‘Cancer Salves’ – A Book About Non-Traditional Cancer Treatment Options Very Few Have Heard About

Written by Steve on 27 September 2010

I write this post for those who do not believe that the ‘traditional’ medical system holds the cure for their cancers.

Unfortunately, they may be right.

As far as I can tell, our fight against Cancer has been an almost complete failure if achieving long term ‘cures’ is used as the definition of success.

We may not kill as many with our therapies as they used to, but I do not believe that we can claim significant across-the-board cure rate improvements either.

Frankly, we have not gotten our money’s worth from the research that we have been funding.

These beliefs did not come easily. But, hard analysis of what I have known but refused to admit and what I have seen but refused to see has led me to consider all possibilities in my search for a way to extend my family member’s life.

Thus, I have found myself having to read and consider proposals and claims that are difficult to wrap my head around.

The contents of this book – ‘Cancer Salves – A Botanical Approach To Treatment’ –  is a good example of what I am talking about.

The author, Ingrid Naiman, is a rich source for information about alternative medicine’s cancer treatment techniques and the history behind them.

She details one thread of that history in this book – the history of the use of escharotic salves and pastes and tonics to treat cancers.

It is an extremely interesting book, and an amazing series of stories and information that she shares.

Although these techniques are probably most effective when used to treat non-metastatic tumors that are close to the surface, I cannot guarantee that this is the limit of their utility.

I assure you, this is information you will not find being provided to you in your doctor’s office.

She provides a historical backdrop for the reader while explaining in great detail how the salves and tonics are believed to work, and how to use them. A wealth of practical advice and information relative to the strengths and weaknesses of the various products and techniques is also woven into the book’s narrative. Additionally, there are recipes for different versions of these salves, pastes and tonics in the back of the book – information that it would be difficult for most people to track down in time.

I have exchanged several e-mails with the author. She is an amazing fountain of information – and I would encourage anyone looking for alternative paths to go to her website, read the information that is posted there, establish communications with her.

The link to one of her websites is http://www.cancersalves.com/ .

It is possible that what you are looking for is there.

The Gerson Therapy – Was Doctor Gerson A Quack?

Written by Steve on 02 August 2010

Max Gerson, M.D. was a physician who claimed to have developed a protocol that could cure cancer. He is dead now, but his legacy lives on in alternative cancer treatment centers around the world – with the most famous one being located in Mexico.

Mainstream healthcare providers frequently react with extreme skepticism and/or claims of quackery when asked their opinion of Dr Gerson’s theories and protocols.

I reacted the same way when I heard of this physician’s claims and beliefs. Some of his proposals sounded completely nutty to me.

But there is nothing like knowing that a loved one has an advanced cancer that most people die from to make you reexamine your assumptions and what you accept as fact.

You see, I know that the treatments we currently subject patients to almost always have poor outcomes if the patients’ cancers are not discovered early and cut out.

So… as part of my study of options that might be useful to extend my family member’s life… I forced myself to put aside dogma and my biases and pre-conceptions so that I wouldn’t miss something that might work.

Thus, it was inevitible that I would end up reading Dr Gerson’s book – ‘A Cancer Therapy: Results of Fifty Cases and the Cure of Advanced Cancer’. In fact, I read it several times.

It was a difficult read. The first time I read it I had to re-read the chapters several times because it was extremely difficult to get my mind wrapped around the ideas presented by this physician. Every time I progressed to a new idea my subconscious mind told me it was nuts and I was wasting my time. It was a tortuous process.

Pharmacists are extremely conventional in their perspectives, and – as a group – we tend to have been strongly indoctrinated to the status quo. But, slowly it dawned on me that I had to interpret Dr Gerson’s writings and theories based on the state of scientific knowledge when he was practicing - to look for what I call ‘convergence’ of the data and ideas and the assumptions behind them with new knowledge that originates from other sources.

Then, the pieces started to fall into place. I won’t detail Dr Gerson’s theories in this post. If you need the information there are many books out there that will explain in much more detail than I can. But I will say this – I can point out case after case of convergence between his claims and protocols and information that is documented in journal articles that have been published in the recent past.

I do not know whether the people who are running his clinics are curing cancers or not. I have seen documentaries where patients claim they are. I do not know if Dr Gerson actually cured cancers or not, although there are many claims that he did. I do not know if Dr Gerson was a good man or not, but I have heard recordings of interviews that seem to show a physician who believed with all his heart that he was helping people.

I haven’t drug my loved one to the Gerson clinic in Mexico – things happened too fast and my learning curve limited my ability to assimilate enough data soon enough to even consider whether or not that trip should have been made. But….  as my learning has progressed I find myself implementing things into her day-to-day activities that could easily qualify as spin offs of therapies proposed by Dr Gerson.

And every day I find evidence that Dr Gerson may have been correct in many of his actions.

So, I find that I must say that I do NOT believe that Max Gerson, M.D. was a quack.

You can find more information about clinics that practice the Gerson Therapy if you’re interested in learnng more about his protocols at http://www.gerson.org/ .

Again – I’m a pharmacist, not a doctor. I’m providing information I think you might want to talk to your doctor about. Good luck.

Gerson Again – Convergence With Others’ Claims and Theories

Written by Steve on 16 August 2010

The recent post about Doctor Gerson and his theories about treating cancer has generated quite a few enquiries.

In that post I talked about what I believed to be a convergence – or coming together – of more recent claims and findings with the protocols detailed by Doctor Gerson.

People want to know more details about these convergences.

I’ll attempt to explain the most significant ones.

An oversimplified summary of Doctor Gerson’s protocol and the reasons behind the various elements of his therapies includes:

1. Increase the patient’s immune response by stimulating the person’s organs and systems to a state of increased vigilence – with an emphasis on the function of the liver and the system of organs that your food flows through from your mouth to your you-know-what. Included in this stimulation are the organs that are associated with this system. Eventually, a majority of the patient’s organs would be involved in this effort to improve immune function.

2. To achieve this stimulation of the immune system and the body’s ability to recognize and kill cancer cells various substances were delivered into the digestive system and to the liver. These substances were given by mouth and via enemas of various types.  The most famous enemas were the infamous ‘coffee’ enemas, and the primary stimulatory substance taken by mouth was castor oil.

3. Doctor Gerson also strongly believed that it was possible to increase the body’s ability to mount an immune response by changing the concentration of mineral ions in the body – most notably potassium and sodium. He believed that it was important to drive the body’s potassium level up and the sodium level down. The goal of this effort to change ion concentrations was the alteration of the voltages that exist across the membranes and structures of the body’s cells.

4. To achive these changes in the body’s potassium and sodium levels Doctor Gerson administered a solution that contained a specific combination of potassium compounds along with a regimen of fruit and vegetable greens juice. These extracts were made from fruits and greens that are known to be high in potassium.

5. To further rev up the body’s metabolic and immune systems Doctor Gerson gave patients doses of iodine and potassium iodide (Lugol’s Solution – 5%), dessicated thyroid (aka ‘Armour Thyroid’), and niacin.

6. In additon to the fruit and vegetable greens juices patients were given a raw liver drink. The purpose of this drink was the provision of nutrients to the patient – and particularly to his/her liver.

7. Without explanation – and despite a ban on ‘fats and oils’ – Doctor Gerson’s protocols called for the administration of flax seed oil every day.

Although there are many other details, the list above is pretty representative of the strategies Doctor Gerson was trying to implement to save his patients’ lives.

So, now we go forward to today.

Because of contamination problems that make it hard to get safe liver for making the liver drink the people controlling the Gerson Protocol switched to dessicated liver tablets. Then it appears that they switched from the liver tablets to Coenzyme Q10 supplements.

This switch to CoQ10 converges with current theories about CoQ10′s ability to re-energize cell’s mitochondria, especially when combined with doses of niacinamide.

Niacinamide is what niacin is converted to by patients’ livers. Another convergence.

Fruit juices and garden greens contain a multitude of vitamins and minerals. Maybe more importantly, they contain bioflavanoids. In general, flavanoids are the molecules that often give a plant’s fruit its color. They are known to frequently survive the digestive system and their trip through the liver. Most importantly, flavanoids are widely believed to be able to suppress cancer cells’ growth and metastasis. Convergence.

There is a growing body of evidence that indicates that we need more iodine than we are currently getting in our diets. If you don’t have enough of the right forms of iodine your thyroid gland can’t make thyroid hormone that works right. Without thyroid hormone your body’s metabolism – and everything else – slows down. A patient’s immune response and ability to mount a counterattack can also be expected to be depressed. This has been named Type 2 Hypothyroidism by doctor Mark Starr in the recent past, and there are those who strongly believe that the administration of dessicated thyroid and iodine supplements are necessary to correct this problem and make the body’s systems work as they’re supposed to. Convergence once again.

The people who talk of iodine and thyroid supplementation explain that the goal of their supplementation is an increase of the body’s electric potentials. Integral to that discussion is the increase in potassium levels to alter the electrical gradients across cell and structure membranes. Convergence, convergence, convergence.

And, finally, it is becoming well known that the oils that one eats can have a very significant impact on your body’s metabolism and well being. One of the oils that is recommended to reduce global inflammation and promote proper immune response is flax seed oil. It is the richest source of Omega-3 fatty acids generally available as a food oil. Convergence.

So, short as this post is, I hope it helps you understand where convergences appear to be occuring with Doctor Gerson’s teachings.. Sorry for not going into even more detail, but this topic could fill a book.

If you want more info on some of the topics I touched on above feel free to click on any of the books listed on the right edge of this blog to get yourself taken to BarnesAndNoble.com to see more details.

Neulasta and gCSF Receptor Stimulation

Written by Steve on 02 August 2010

In a previous post I talked about whether an alcohol/water extract of raw ginger root could positively impact the kill rate of cancers – particularly ovarian cancer.

In that post I pasted a couple of charts that showed a change in slope of lines that model an actual patient’s CA125 levels as her therapy progressed. This change in slope suggests that something increased the kill rate for this patient’s tumors, and a review of changes in this patient’s treatment regimen indicated that the change in slope occured around the time that the patient started taking the ginger supplement.

HOWEVER, in that post I also mentioned the fact that another event that might correlate with the change was the starting of Neulasta injections 24 hours after each chemo session.

I can make what I believe to be a convincing case for either the ginger supplement or Neulasta. Or, perhaps both interact with each other. I simply don’t know because no further studies have been performed.

Neulasta’s product insert clearly cautions that there is a possibility of stimulation of gCSF receptors and increased tumor growth. However, the consensus in the literature in the USA is that Neulasta does NOT cause ovarian tumors to grow. And I can accept that finding. However, studies that have been published elsewhere in the world have shown that about 50% of ovarian tumors have gCSF receptors.

IF Neulasta was involved in the change observed for the patient I referenced earlier I would hypothesize that the gCSF receptors are activated, and in some way this forced the tumors to try to reproduce and/or blocked cell cycle pauses that allow tumor cells to repair the damage done by chemo agents like carboplatin.

If I was being treated for ovarian cancer – and maybe other solid tumor cancers – I would seriously consider taking the ginger supplement that I posted the recipe for previously and Neulasta injections 24 hours after chemo administration.

Of course, I’m a pharmacist – not a physician. You must talk to your physician before starting any new supplements or medications. And, if your doctor and you decide to try the ginger supplement you must follow the rules laid out in the posts associated with it. Do NOT assume ginger is not a powerful substance.

Aspirin and Breast Cancer

Written by Steve on 21 May 2010

Potentially Life Saving Information for Breast Cancer Patients:

Can taking one regular strength (325mg) aspirin tablet per day save your life?

Maybe.

Two articles that have been recently published say that some women can cut their risk of getting breast cancer or dying after being diagnosed with breast cancer by taking an aspirin a day. Both of these articles were published in the magazines that doctors read. So, you have to believe that they might be telling the truth.

The first article was published in THE JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY. It’s title is ‘Aspirin Intake and Survival After Breast Cancer’, and it was written by a team of researches from Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard, and the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. 

OK, they have my attention. These are places where very smart people work.

In their article they say that their studies show them that women who have  been diagnosed with Stage I, II, or III Breast Cancer – and who have lived a year after diagnosis – can cut their risk of dying and the risk of their cancers spreading to other sites by more than 50%.  And – it didn’t seem to matter what stage the cancer was, whether the woman had gone through menopause or not, how thin or heavy set they were, or whether their tumors were estrogen receptor sensitive or not.

That’s HUGE information!!!

The article is not available for free, but I’m sure your local librarian or a librarian at a major hospital or university library will  be able to help you get a copy that you can read and give to your Doctor without your having to pay for it. Just tell them you’re looking for the journal article titled ‘Aspirin Intake and Survival After Breast Cancer’ written by Michelle D. Holmes et. al. and published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology. Tell them it was published ahead of print on Feb 16, 2010. They will know how to find it.

The second article was published in JAMA – The Journal of the American Medical Association – in May of 2004. It’s available free of charge from the JAMA website at http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/291/20/2433 . The website will probably tell you you’re not a subscriber. I just clicked on my back arrow and the article showed up. If that doesn’t work for you do a google search for ‘ mary beth terry jama breast cancer ‘. Or, you can get a copy from one of the librarian sources I listed above for the other article.

ANYWAY – The title of this article is ‘Association of Frequency and Duration of Aspirin Use and Hormone Receptor Status With Breast Cancer Risk’ and – as I said above – it was published in JAMA. The authors are Mary Beth Terry et. al. and they come from Columbia University, the University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill, Mt. Sinai School of Medicine, Cornell University, and the Strang Cancer Prevention Center. (hope I didn’t miss anyone) Ditto on the smart people comment above.

The authors of this article say that they saw around a 20% reduction in cancer cases when patients were taking aspirin every day. They also saw around a 15% reduction in risk with daily ibuprofen (Motrin, Advil, and other brand names) use. This study did not find a reduction in cancer prevention rates unless the breast cancer was estrogen receptor positive.

Please get copies of these articles – or print out a copy of this blog note – and talk to your Physician about them and whether you should be taking an aspirin a day or not.

As always, Do NOT start taking aspirin or any other medication without talking to your Physician and getting his OK.

I’m a pharmacist – not a doctor – and am providing information that I think is important for you to talk to your doctor about.

I am NOT recommending that you take these medications without your physicians’ OK!!!

There are some people who absolutely should not be taking Aspirin, Ibuprofen, or any other NSAID medication – So make sure your Doctor agrees it is safe before you start.

oh yeah…. in case you didn’t know – et. al. is used by geeks who read journal articles when they’re too lazy to write out the names of all the authors who were listed for the article they’re referencing. don’t be intimidated. you have all the information you need to get a copy of the article so that your doctor or other health care provider can read it. and, when you get a copy don’t let the techno-jargon intimidate you. you don’t have to know it. your doctor will know how to read and interpret it. the most important information is usually contained in a summary section at the first of the article anyway

DCA (Dichloroacetate) and Cancer – Thoughts and Update

Written by Steve on 18 August 2010

In December of 2007 I worked graveyard shift at a local hospital and gave little thought to alternative therapies, nutrition and/or cancer therapies.

But I did read an article that New Scientist magazine had published about a Canadian professor who worked at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada and the theories proposed by him and a team of unusual depth and breadth about the causes of some cancers and a substance that might be used to cure them. You can find a copy of that article here – http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn10971-cheap-safe-drug-kills-most-cancers.html .

That professor – Evangelos Michelakis – and his team had published the results of laboratory studies that indicated that a substance called dichloroacetate (DCA) could be used to cause upregulation of cancer cells’ mitochondrial activity, and that this could cause cancer cells to kill themselves - while normal cells remained unaffected.

You can find a copy of that article here - http://www.cell.com/cancer-cell/retrieve/pii/S1535610806003722 .

After reading the article I felt compelled to understand this claim more fully, so I devoted significant time and energy to following up on the information that had been presented and the substance called DCA.

Then, once I thought I had a handle on the fundamental information, I promptly got busy with other things and forgot about it. After all, I was NOT an oncology pharmacist. In fact, I worked hard to stay as far away from that work as I could.

But pharmacists never know what people will ask them to help them with, and while I was walking through one of the wards one night a nurse stopped me and started telling me about her dad and asking me if I had any alternative ‘ideas’ he could try.

You see, her dad was a doctor and he had terminal lung cancer. I told her – with as much compassion as I could muster at 3AM – that I didn’t know anything more than the docs already did, but I would keep my eyes open.

As I worked my way back to the pharmacy that little voice that nags at you when you’ve done less than your best started whispering in my ear about dichloroacetate.

By the end of the shift I had printed out the article and some other information I’d previously tracked down, and I gave it – along with caveats and a summary of my understanding of the information – to the nurse who had stopped me. She told me she’d get it to her dad right away. I promptly got back to my work and forgot about it.

A week or so later that same nurse stopped me again and told me that her dad sent his thanks, and he was so appreciative for the information. In fact, she told me, he’d already gotten access to some DCA through a pharmacist somewhere and was taking it. He wasn’t sure how it was supposed to be mixed or the dose, but the pharmacist had helped him, and he thought he was on the right track. But, she told me, it was ‘fearsome stuff’ to take. I told her I was glad I could help and got back to work.

The next time I saw that nurse she stopped me again. She told me that her dad had stopped taking the DCA because he’d developed some severe neuropathy and it didn’t seem to be working.

As I walked away from that conversation I felt frustrated and angry. Angry that I didn’t have enough information to answer her questions about the toxicity, dosing, and side effect causes for this ‘drug’, and angry that it wasn’t working.

So, I took another look at DCA. A REAL look, from a pharmacist’s point of view.

In the meantime, things had really heated up on the mainstream media side. New Scientist magazine had published a couple more articles about DCA and this professor’s work, all the while emphasizing that it was all so preliminary and speculative and nobody should be trying to use it. The University of Alberta had also published a disclaimer on its website that basically said that they supported their research team to the fullest, but what they were saying shouldn’t really be listened to. It was, after all, only theory and lab results.

But the genie was out of the bottle, and the public was clamoring for access to this substance. The U.S. regulatory folk had put on a full press to keep people from getting DCA, but websites had sprung up with DCA being the only topic. Despite it being banned, people were somehow getting access to DCA. But they were getting the neuropathy problems and problems with formulation too.

Eventually, the public pressure and support for this substance reached such a fevered pitch that people were making donations to the University of Alberta to fund a clinical trial to figure out whether DCA worked as claimed or not. Maybe then – they thought – they would be able to get access to DCA.

You can get info on that trial’s progress and the university’s position on the topic at http://www.dca.med.ualberta.ca/Home/index.cfm .

And - as I started to say above – I got a lot smarter about DCA and its use in other clinical trials to treat hereditary diseases that had at their roots mitochondrial dysfunction, misregulation and failure to produce energy properly.

It quickly became apparent that dosing DCA could not be done as we usually dosed medications. It had a unique characteristic by which the body adapted to it and stopped metabolizing it as quickly after awhile. This would lead to blood levels that were higher than intended and the appearance of a multitude of side effects – including neuropathy. It was also noted that mixing this caustic material into a drink that could be safely consumed was tricky – and I noted that most people wouldn’t know enough to get it mixed up right.

Mixed improperly DCA would indeed be something that would be ‘fearsome’ to take. But, I had tracked down the title of an article that detailed how they had mixed the DCA for the mitochondrial disease trials.

Obviously one would need a sharp pharmacist and the information in the article to get this one right.

I studied this information as fast as I could, as I knew the nurse would be stopping me again to talk about her dad, his disease, and DCA. I wanted to be prepared. Then the word was circulating around the wards that this nurse’s dad had died. Everyone was sad. I wished I’d have been smarter and studied harder sooner.

So, I put all my data into a binder and continued to follow the clinical trial that was finally beginning to recruit patients. But trials take forever to get going and completed …. so I got busy with other things and forgot about it.

A couple of months ago I read an update on those trials – I truthfully don’t remember where – but the bottom line is that they studied a limited number of patients who had the deadly brain cancer glioblastoma, and the results seem to indicate that the DCA was capable of positively impacting those patient’s outcomes. You can find a copy of the journal article that details the trial’s results here – http://dca-information.pbworks.com/f/Metabolic%20Modulation%20of%20Glioblastoma%20with%20Dichloroacetate.pdf.

Notice – if you would – that the mainstream press did NOT hype this trial’s results. In fact, it wasn’t covered at all – as far as I can tell – except for the one article I blundered across while looking for alternatives for my family member. (Just in case the protocol she’s currently following fails. You know.)

Anyway – back to topic – there is something just wrong about that. It’s major news, I think.

And I find myself wanting to make sure I don’t come up short again on my support of those trying to keep themselves alive.

So… I’m listing the info about the article that contains what your doc and pharmacist would need to mix and dose DCA safely below.

The article that details how to mix DCA right is titled ‘Development of an Oral Drug Formulation for Dichloroacetate and Thamine‘, and its reference is:

Henderson GN, Whalen PO, Darr RA, Curry SH, Darendorf H, Baumgartner TG and Stacpoole PW. ‘Development of a Drug Formulation for Dichloroacetate and Thiamine‘. Drug Development and Industrial Pharmacy. 20(15), 2425-2437 (1994).

You can find the article at http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a785358792~frm=titlelink .

I’m giving you this address to help your librarian find you a copy – either through their contracted online providers or interlibrary loan. Or you can try the librarian at a major hospital or cancer center. If you don’t want to wait you can buy access to the article. But it’s not cheap. If all else fails or you are out of time drop me an e-mail using the links on this website and I’ll try to get you access to a copy.

It is my understanding that some cancer centers in Canada are already making this substance available to their patients. There are a plethora of websites that have information about it. I am sure there are many who can fill in the blanks much better than I can, and saying more seems to border on advocating you take this substance. A good starting point might be this site: http://www.thedcasite.com/index.html.

Let me be clear – I am NOT advocating this substance for the treatment of cancer.

I am also NOT saying that I think it has no chance of working.

(In fact, please note that I have devoted a lot of time that I should have been dedicating to sleep to getting this info posted for your review and consideration.)

I AM trying to stay true to my goal of providing you with unbiased and balanced information that I believe hasn’t been properly delivered to the public so that you can have a discussion with your physicians about whether it might be an option or not.

I know people are trying DCA – and I also know it is a dangerous substance if not properly dosed and formulated. So – to try to keep people from getting hurt and/or improperly treated – I’ve provided the reference to the article that contains the information that your doctor and pharmacist will need to properly dose and compound it for you if your physician wants to try it.

Most of what you need to know is in the article I referenced above, and your physician and pharmacist will know how to get a copy of it – or if they can’t – your university’s library or hospital librarian will know how to get you a copy.

This is NOT a substance you should tackle on your own without medical support!

Again – I’m a Pharmacist, not a Physician. Pharmacists Pharmacist. Physicians Physician. Talk to your physician and get his/her buyin before trying this or any other drug.

A ‘Crazy’ Theory – Use CoQ10 and Niacinamide Instead of Dichloroacetate (DCA)?

Written by Steve on 14 September 2010

Most cancer patients are searching for something else they can do in addition to what their doctors are prescribing to increase their odds of survival.  Some are looking for something to try instead of what their doctors have proposed. This is because they know that the therapies their doctors are prescribing frequently fail. For these patients this search is a matter of life and death.

I understand this mindset completely, and search night and day for the same thing for a family member who is trying to survive cancer.

And, every once in awhile the information I plow through comes together in my mind to form an idea that I think might really work to buy time for some cancer patients.

What I’m about to tell you is one of those ideas.

I emphasize that this is only a theory. I have no hard data that says it will work. You won’t find it written about anywhere else. You won’t find clinical trial data for it. People will undoubtedly question it and tell you it won’t work.

If you decide to try it you’ll truly be running what I call a ‘Clinical Trial of One’, and you’ll be assuming responsibility for the outcomes – good or bad.

But, I’ve checked, double checked, and rechecked the information that this theory is based upon – and if I had cancer and was trying to buy time for myself I would absolutely be adding this idea to my treatment plan. I’d try it as an adjunct to traditional treatments to help get me into remission, I’d try it on its own to see if I could get myself into remission, I’d definately use it to try to keep myself in remission. In other words, I believe.

I say this with the caveat that – as always – you MUST let your physician know what you’re doing. The goal is to present options and the supporting information and to recruit his/her assistance and support – not to do things behind her/his back.

Please note – having given you the caveat above – I feel strongly enough about this one that I will tell you that – unless the docs can point out something I’ve missed and convince me that they know what they’re talking about – I’d try this even if my doc didn’t approve. I’m not telling you you should. I’m telling you that’s what I would do. But, keep in mind - we KNOW I’m ‘Crazy’.

We’ve talked previously about the Canadian physician (Evangelos D Michelakis, MD) and the team at the University of Alberta that believes DCA (dichlroacetate) can cause many cancer cells to die because it can return the cancer cells’ mitochondria to proper function, which then enables the cells to recognize they’re supposed to kill themselves.

A search of the literature for dichloroacetate’s use to return mitochondria to proper function will bring you to many references of its use for the treatment of children with a hereditary disease that results in mitochondria that don’t work right.

If you take a look at who the pioneering researcher was for many of those studies you’ll find a man named Peter Stacpoole, MD PhD.

I submit for your consideration that Doctor Stacpoole’s research and the research being done in Canada relative to using DCA to improve the function of mitochondria converge with each other. Different diseases, but the same goal – get the mitochondria working again.

So, what is Doctor Stacpoole involved with now? Same thing. Trying to get the mitochondria to work – only this time he’s involved in a Phase III clinical trial of the use of CoEnzyme Q10 to upregulate the mitochondria and reverse these kids’ disease. You can find a copy of the clinical trial info at http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00432744?term=coenzyme+q10&rank=34. The dose they’re using is 10 mg/kg (or 10mg/2.2 pounds) up to a maximum dose of 400mg.

(It’s critical to note that – as far as I can tell – the form of CoQ10 that they’re using for Doctor Stacpoole’s stucy is ubiquiNOL, not the more commonly available ubiquiNONE. UbiquiNOL is absorbed from your gut much better than ubiquiNONE – with reports indicating that ubiquiNOL is absorbed from 6 to 8 times better. Regardless of which form you use, split the daily doses up so you’re taking a dose multiple times per day. I think the product they’re using for the study is LiQ-NOL™. Another product that you could use is Liquid QH™. Both are highly concentrated formulations of ubiquiNOL. Both are available online.)

Anyway, I think this information is extremely interesting.

We already know that CoQ10 is associated with mitochondrial function, and that deficiencies of CoQ10 cause reduced mitochondrial function. We also know – if you believe the data coming out of the Canadian labs and clinical trial – that increasing mitochondrial function with DCA improves cancer treatment outcomes. You can find info on the completed clinical trial at http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00540176?term=dichloroacetate&rank=4.

Now that a team has had the courage to push forward with this idea you’ll find a lot of other clinical trials recruiting patients. (http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?term=dichloroacetate) Funny how that works, isn’t it?

Anyway, you’ll also find – if you do a literature search on PubMed and Google around a bit – that CoQ10 is being tried for several disease states, and has been approved by the FDA on an orphan drug basis for the treatment of a few.

However, reading through the trials data you will find that sometimes it works well, and other times it doesn’t work well at all.

This indicates to me that CoEnzyme Q10 is not the whole story. There must be something else that is needed for the CoQ10 to work right.

This brings us to niacinamide.

Remember, Dr Gerson put his patients on high doses of Niacin when he started treating their cancers – and remember that niacin is converted in the human body to niacinamide. So, high doses of niacin = high doses of niacinamide. 

And niacinamide is noted in several studies to be able to upregulate mitochondrial function and protect mitochondria from chemical attack. In fact, some studies suggest that it works better than CoQ10 in some ways.

More interesting data, but what we’re looking for is more than upregulation of mitochondria and/or protection from poisons. We’re looking for significant increases in the production of ATP.

Which brings us to a study that I found referenced in a book written by Russell L. Blaylock, M.D. titled ‘Excitotoxins – The Taste That Kills’. On pages 236-237 Doctor Blaylock tells us that this study found that combining CoQ10 and niaciniamide caused a ‘significant increase in brain cell ATP levels’. The reference for this study is listed as Beal MF, et al. Coenzyme Q10 and niacinamide are neuroprotective against mitochondrial toxins in vivo. Neurology (supplement 2) A177, 1994.

I’d give you the link to this document, but there’s a problem. I can’t find it. I’ve looked really hard. I’ve had reference librarians at two medical libraries look for it. I’ve had my daughter – who works for a drug development company – look for it. It can’t be found. I can find similar work by Doctor Beal. I just can’t find this article.

This brings us to a judgement call. I can believe Dr Blaylock really has read this paper and is smart enough to summarize its findings, or I can throw the reference and associated information out. In my searches for this article I’ve found it referenced by several other authors. Maybe they didn’t read it either. I simply can’t explain it – and I have moved on to other searches. But I will tell you that – based on my review of other work by this professor and the documents that have referenced the article in question – I believe.

Which finally brings me to propose that if I had cancer I would add CoEnzyme Q10 and niacinamide to my daily regimen. EXCEPT from 5 days before to 3 days after a chemotherapy or radiation session. During that time period I would not take either CoEnzyme Q10 or niacinamide unless my physician told me it was ok.

Since no one has tried this before as far as I can tell, the doses are going to be completely pulled out of my you-know-what. But, I suspect high doses are good doses for this application.

For Dr Stacpoole’s study they’re using a maximum dose of 400mg of CoQ10 (ubiquiNOL)per day. I’d spread it out over two or three doses (e.g. 200mg twice a day), but – based on human trials data that I’ve reviewed – I don’t think it really matters. I’ve read abstracts and summaries of studies that used 300 mg of CoQ10 (ubiquiNONE) per day to positively impact breast cancer outcomes (see the article link it my previous post on CoEnzyme Q10). There are references for the use of doses of a German brand of nano-particular CoQ10 (ubiquiNONE) all the way up to 1200 mg/day (for the treatment of Parkinson’s disease – http://altmedicine.about.com/cs/supplements/a/CoenzymeQ10.htm). At that dose I’d definately spread the doses out.

Niacinamide dosing is something I’m still studying. But, I’m currently taking 1000 mg/day with no ill effects. I found reference to using up to 5000 mg/day to treat joint problems (http://www.doctoryourself.com/kaufman5.html). I’d start at 500 mg twice a day and slowly increase my dose – while watching out for bad side effects/reactions – till I got near 4000 – 5000 mg/day. Bigger doses might be OK. I will have to research more. Anyway, keep your physician in the loop and rely on him/her to make sure you’re tolerating the niacinamide well. Oh yeah, in the reference they state that they got better results if they broke the doses into several smaller doses per day. I’d try to take partial doses every 4-6 hours.

So, I’ll close by reminding you that Pharmacists Pharmacist, Physicians Physician. Keep your doc in the loop and make sure you’re being properly monitored. Again, I remind you… I’m telling you what I would do, not what you should do. Talk it over with your doc. Print out the references and provide them to your doc. And DON’T take either niacinamide or CoQ10 within the pre and post chemo/radiation timeframes I talked about above unless your physician specifically says it’s OK.