Cancer Proposed Common Cause and ...

[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
Cancer
Proposed Common Cause and Cure
for All Forms of Cancer
(and Schizophrenia?, see Item 29)
(Cesium Cancer Treatment, see Item 37)
David W. Gregg, Ph.D.
188 Calle La Montana
Moraga, CA 94556
Phone: (925) 284-5434
This Page was started March, 1999 and continually developed up to the present. I have
added new insights/information at the end as they occurr without rewriting what was
written before. This was easiest for me and also leaves a historical record of how
technical progress developed. The latest information will be at the end with the exception
of Summaries which are presented at the begining.
Send e-mail to David Gregg
at
Health Notes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This paper is for information only. It represents the observations, views and
opinions of the author, but is not a recommendation for treatment. Anyone
reading it should consult his/her physician before considering treatment.
Summary
As of February, 2004
A Defense in Depth:
This web page presents what could be classified as an alternative-medicine, "Defense in
Depth" against the progression of cancer. Two fundamentally different approaches are
described, the combination of which should provide a profound defense. One invokes a
nutritional approach and the other invokes the use of toxins. Each has numerous sub-
options. I am not a medical doctor and am not qualified to comment on prescription
drugs. Thus, they are not considered.
1) The Nutritional Approach:
The nutritional approach stimulates cancer cells to
revert from anaerobic back to aerobic metabolism, causing them to revert from cancer
cells back to normal cells. This process allows the cells to activate the p53 gene which
produces proteins that induce apoptosis (normal programmed cell death).
It involves
nutrients that stimulate all three stages of aerobic metabolism, a) oxygen (oxidation
potential) transport from the lungs to the cells, b) enhancing the steps of the Kreb's
cycle, and c) enhancing the Respiratory Chain.
These all require a multitude of
vitamins, minerals, etc. that are discussed. In most cases, enhancing oxygen transport
from the lungs to the cells is probably the limiting and thus most important step and thus
it will be addressed in more detail.
Oxygen Transport:
Hemoglobin (Red blood cells) is the component in blood that serves
as the primary transporter of oxygen from the lungs to cells. However, cancer cells can
not obtain oxygen from hemoglobin. Their anaerobic metabolism does not produce
carbon dioxide which is required to displace oxygen out of the hemoglobin. Thus, once a
cancer is started it stabilizes itself in that state by obstructing the delivery of oxygen. In
order to overcome this, certain nutrients (many options) can be consumed that increase
oxygen carrying capacity of the blood in a way that is independent of hemoglobin and
does not depend on the production of carbon dioxide to deliver oxygen (oxidtive
potential). The delivery of oxygen allows the cancer cells to start turning on aerobic
metabolism. Once this starts, it initiates an avalanche effect. The cells start to produce
carbon dioxide, which then causes the red blood cells to start to release oxygen, which
stimulates more aerobic metabolism and carbon dioxide release, etc. The end result is the
cancer cells receive adequate oxygen to initiate a quasi-normal, aerobic metabolism state.
In this state they have enough energy to activate the p53 gene to produce the proteins that
can cause apoptosis. The reason cancer cells can live forever is that they can (and must)
rigorously avoid apoptosis. The converted cells gradually die off.
This theory makes sense to me for many reasons. It invokes sound biochemistry, is
consistent with the observations I present on this web page, and clearly explains why
cancer cells are destroyed why normal cells are not. In fact, normal cell health would be
enhanced in the process. I suspect that most of the reported observations of various
nutritional/herbal treatments resulting in recovery from cancer fall in this category even
though the precise chemistry of how they work has not been identified.
When would this approach fail? I can think of one possibility. If the p53 gene has
mutated (been seriously damaged) then turning on aerobic metabolism, supplying needed
energy, will not be sufficient to activate the p53 gene and apoptosis will not take place.
Unless another programmed cell death mechanism takes over, the cells will eventually
return to being cancer cells. There is also a possibility that the enhanced nutrition may
make the cancer cells more healthy while it makes the normal cells more healthy. In this
situation, the toxin approach, discussed below, will have to be relied on. Thus enters the
"Defense in Depth" concept.
2) The Toxin Approach:
The second approach employs the use of toxins that do kill
the cancer cells by a toxic effect. There are many examples of this. However, in my
analysis of the mechanism of
ionic cesium (cesium chloride), combined with increased
potassium (potassium chloride)
intake, I was extremely surprised to discover the real
mechanism by which it operates and identify how truly profound it is. I concluded the
mechanism presented to date on the internet was totally wrong and serously obsured the
true potential of this appraoch. My present conclusion is that it stands out from all other
such toxin approaches as being almost the perfect solution.
Briefly, the cesium ions are taken into the cell via the sodium-potassium pump,
substituting for potassium, and are trapped there. Not only are the cesium ions trapped,
but they also block the exit of the potassium ions by blocking the potassium channel
proteins in the cell walls. The accumulation of cesium and potassium ions in the cell
negates the voltage potential across the cell membrane. This voltage potential is required
to energize the sodium-glucose co-transport system that feeds the cell. The cell thus
starves. There would also be an accumulation of ions in the cell which will cause the cells
to swell, due to osmotic pressure, and possibly burst.
This is true for all cells. Why are cancer cells impacted far faster/greater than normal
cells? The sodium-potassium pump, energized by ATP, pumps two potassium ions into
the cell while pumping three sodium ions out. This creates a charge imbalance that would
stop the pump unless there was another path by which the sodium ions reenter. That
happens via the sodium-glucose co-transport system in the cell membrane. Thus, the rate
that the sodium-potassium operates is dictated by the glucose requirement of the cell.
Cancer cells, which are anaerobic, require 20 times more glucose than normal cells to
obtain the same amount of energy. Therefore, their sodium-potassium pumps operate 20
times faster than normal cells. Thus, they will pump cesium into their cells 20 times faster
than normal cells, and will experience starvation (and bursting) 20 times faster.
Since not only are the cesium ions trapped, but also potassium ions, this will result in a
serious lowering of potassium in the blood which must be compensated for, which is easy
to do. If it isn't, the lowering of the potassium level in the blood could cause death. I
should mention that "Salt Substitute" available in every grocery store is potassium
chloride and is a good, convenient source of potassium.
The trick is to establish a protocol where the cancer cells enter starvation and stop the
treatment before the normal cells follow. Cesium eventually exits the cells, but very
slowly. Thus, once the cancer cells have entered starvation, treatment can stop and the
cancer cells will continue to starve for an extended period of time.
An additional feature of this approach is that the cancer cells are abruptly deprived of
glucose, abruptly arresting their progression, but not necessarily resulting in an abrupt
die-off. One might expect this to be more gradual than other cancer treatments. Thus
there is a lower risk of experiencing severe toxic effects due to rapid cell die-off of cells
common to other treatment approaches.
As broadly reported on the internet, cesium chloride has been used successfully to treat
cancer. My contribution is to discover its correct mechanism, described above. This
should not only enhance its scientific credibility, but help researchers and treatment
clinics optimize its use.
Otto Warburg found that all cancer cells are anaerobic, and both of these approaches
work on the anaerobic nature of cancer cells. Logically, the combination of the two
should be effective for all forms of cancer. Will it be enough? Only time will tell if this
dream will come true.
Cesium update as of 2/20/04:
I have just had conversations with a clinic in Canada that
has had considerable experience with treating cancer with cesium. They told me that they
have found it to be successful in about 50% of their patients. Thus, it is not as perfect as
the theory might predict. However, the patients seeking cesium therapy are generally
those who have already exhausted all that current medicine has to offer and have been
told there was nothing else that could be done for them. In this context, a 50% recovery
rate could be viewed as quite positive. However, at this stage of experience, it is certainly
not a treatment that one would choose before exploring what current medicine has to
offer. Hopefully, with further development of the treatment protocol the success rate will
impove, approaching the initial expectations.
Cesium update as of 5/16/04:
I just received an email pointing out an important
technical criticism concerning my cesium theory. It was pointed out that there is more
than one glucose transport mecnamism into the cells. There is the "active" sodium-
glucose co-transport system that I have discussed, and there is also a concentration driven
transport system depending on GLUT proteins in the cell wall that does not depend on
sodium or the sodium-potassium pump. It is driven solely by the glucose concentration
gradient across the cell wall. If this is the dominant transport mechanism, which is
dependent on the type of cell and glucose concentrations, then my argument for the lethal
mechanism of cesium starving the cancer cells no longer holds. However, the GLUT
transport mechanism depends on a relatively high glucose concentration in the blood. At
low glucose concentrations the active sodium cotransport mechanism becomes more
important.
This would lead one to conclude that if the cesium treatment is going to be
effective, it would be important to combine it with a diet that is low in
carbohydrates.
Summary
As of July, 2001
Otto Warburg discovered that most if not all cancer cells are anaerobic in their
metabolism. That discovery provided me with the essential lead for the theory/approach
presented here, which extends this discovery in a particular way. I started with a premise
which, with extensive work, eventually evolved into a solid and useful theory. I have
observed in the history of science that any particular area can wander randomly with little
progress until the correct theory is identified. When it is, then, and only then, there is an
explosion of progress in the field because a coordinated effort with many contributors
becomes feasible. The discovery by Crick and Watson is one familiar example, but there
are many more. It does not have to be complex. A double helix is not a complex concept.
It just has to be the single correct theory identified in a sea of less correct ones. I can only
hope that this is such a theory and will result in a dramatic improvement in the treatment
of cancer. Specifically, I hope it will encourage large supplement producing/marketing
companies to formulate products that will help to accomplish this goal.
The Governing Theory
Cancer cells require anaerobic metabolism to remain cancer cells. The anaerobic
metabolism dictates that they are energy deficient. An anaerobic cell can derive only two
ATP's while an aerobic cell can derive 36 ATP's from the metabolism of a glucose
molecule. With insufficient energy they can no longer operate all the complex control
mechanisms that exist in normal cells. Thus, they operate like primitive cells that divide
and multiply in an uncontrolled manner. When they are caused to revert back to aerobic
metabolism, which is feasible, they then have enough energy to operate the control
mechanisms and assume characteristics of normal, non-cancer cells. This not only arrests
their progression of uncontrolled division and thus growth, but if held in this state long
enough, they undergo programmed cell death, a characteristic of all normal cells. In time,
the cancer progression is not only arrested, but is reversed, even to the point of complete
elimination.
The anaerobic metabolism is triggered by genetic damage, which is not reversible in any
particular cell. However, the anaerobic metabolism is reversible without having to correct
the genetic damage. It thus provides a unique focus of attack. It does not correct the
genetic damage, but does safely cause the elimination of the genetically damaged cells
through programmed cell death. Since it is a characteristic of most if not all cancers, the
treatment should apply to most if not all cancers. Since the process of aerobic metabolism
is the same for all cell types, the same specific treatment, focused on enhancing aerobic
metabolism, should be effective for all types of cancer. It also has the characteristic of
being safe and enhancing the health of normal cells in the process.
The basic approach is first identifying the nutrient(s) and their dose that support each step
of aerobic metabolism. Then supply them all at the same time. For treatment this can
require significantly enhanced doses (megadoses) of some specific nutrients for a period
of time. This is not complex in concept, but it can be in practice.
The evolution of information discovery and analysis in support of the
theory.
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]