Have a Foundation, Let's Conduct Better Cancer Research
Noni fruits, one was cut open. Photo from my book, Chinese version, "PhilNONI, Benefits Derived from PhilNONI Amazing Alternative Therapies"
Causes of cancer
What do you think cause cancer?
A foundation is more flexible and independent in decision making
There are now a lot of cancer research in the world, why conduct another?
One major reason is the inadequacy of the framework of cancer research. The past and current ones being conducted by conventional medicine are premised on the germ theory of disease. That is, cancer is considered as a microbe like virus or byproduct of microbes. However, all these years the germ theory of disease has not yielded a reliable control for cancer.
The cancer research we will conduct is premised on the free radical theories of disease. These include free radicals (atomic oxygen, molecular oxygen, ozone, singlet oxygen, superoxide, nitric oxide) and their derivatives, the reactive oxygen species, or ROS, (hydrogen peroxide, peroxynitrite, nitrous oxide, hydroxyl radical (a misnomer), and more.
Each free radical and ROS is a theory that is why we call them theories. For brevity, we label them free radical theories of disease.
The mechanism is that a free radical or ROS injure the DNA, heredity material, resulting in mutation then in tumor or cancer. Radiation induces copying error in the DNA that also results in mutation then tumor or cancer.
We add radiation as a cause of tumor or cancer.
The wall that separates these two premises of disease is that conventional medicine, that includes Big Pharma, snubs free radicals and ROS as causes of tumor or cancer.
Why should a foundation be involved in cancer research? A foundation is more flexible and independent in decision making than a government agency or a private pharmaceutical company. We presume that this foundation is not out to make profit. Its decisions are guided by the goals to come up with protocol, or drug, or alternative medicine to prevent, treat and cure cancer.
March of Dimes
The March of Dimes or National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis is a good example. It was founded by Basil O’Connor and Franklin Delano Roosevelt when they were still law partners, before the latter was elected governor of New York. Offices were set up in Warm Spring, Georgia where Roosevelt went to cure his legs paralyzed by polio (Kluger, J. Splendid Solution, Jonas Salk and the Conquest of Polio. 2004).
Upon his election as governor then as president of USA, Roosevelt left the management of NFIP to O’Connor. At that time polio was rampaging in USA. Dr. Jonas Salk moved to the University of Pittsburgh to become head of its laboratory. Dr. Salk already had a reputation of being co-inventor with Dr. Thomas Francis, Jr. of the vaccine against the virus that caused the Spanish pandemic flu of 1918-19.
So the NFIP sought the services of Dr. Salk to come up with a vaccine against the polio virus. The first grant to the Pittsburgh laboratory for the polio research was given in 1948. It was used for polio typing that showed that polio virus are of three kinds.
More grants were given to Pittsburgh University laboratory until Dr. Salk and his team were able to formulate a vaccine that went into field trials in 1954. The Salk vaccine was successful against the polio virus that it was launched in April 1955, the tenth death anniversary of Pres. Roosevelt.
The theory of the Salk vaccine was revolutionary. When working on the vaccine against the N1H1, Dr. Francis, Jr. and Dr. Salk were toying with the idea that a killed poliovirus would work as a vaccine. At that time, the prevailing belief was that only live and attenuated virus could work as vaccine. This idea originated from Jenner (inventor of the anti-smallpox vaccine), Louis Pasteur (inventor of the anti-rabies vaccine), and Robert Koch (inventor of anti-tuberculosis vaccine).
The live attenuated virus vaccine was advocated by Dr. Robert Sabin who was also a recipient of research grants from the NFIP.
Dr. Salk proved that it is the shape and size of virus that trigger immunization. He killed the virus and hardened the coat to preserve size and shape with formaldehyde.
Whoever comes first
However, a committee of NFIP decided that whoever came up first with a vaccine effective against polio will be supported by the foundation. Dr. Salk and his team beat Dr. Sabin to the draw. Dr. Sabin was given a chance by Russia to develop his live and attenuated poliovirus vaccine around 1959. In the 1960s both Dr.Salk’s vaccine and Dr. Sabin’s (OPV) were administered in the US to control polio. However, in 2000 the Centers for Disease Control administered Salk vaccine only. OPV controls polio in the vaccinated person but he can infect another person he comes into contact with him. (I have a Hub “Polio in USA, Track Record of Victims (1916-1955) then Control with Salk and Oral Polio Vaccines).
Dr. William Park and Maurice Brodie, his Canadian assistant; pioneered in the use of killed polio virus. However, their formulation was defective that it induced infection on vaccinated persons. Whereupon, they were vilified that they abandoned their work. Dr. Salk, and the polio victims, are the beneficiaries of the work by Dr. Park and Brodie.
The big pharmaceutical companies watched in the sidelines waiting for developments in the Salk and Sabin rivalry. They were given the license for free to manufacture the Salk vaccine. The reason was that it was developed by the NFIP, that was renamed March of Dimes.
The foundation for cancer research can be set up anywhere but preferably in the Philippines. The reason is that this country has the materials with high potential to be developed against cancer.
It cannot be done in the USA because conventional medicine and Big Pharma will block it. They attempted to block the Trials to Assess Chelation Therapy. Due to complaints they filed against it while the study was already on the way, US Congress was forced to conduct a hearing. This delayed the study for three months that some American volunteers withdrew from it. Fortunately, Canadian volunteers filled up the deficiency in number of participants.
Treating cancer with a nutriceutical like noni is a no-no in USA.
The most promising is the plant noni (Morinda citrifolia, Linn.). A research had been done by the staff of the University of the Philippines, Manila campus. It was found that even a low concentration of noni, 2.5% to 5%, killed colon cancer in the test tube. Research had also been done in USA as reported by Dr. Abbas Qutab, MD. PhD. about the ability of noni to halt growth of cancer cells, in his book,” Nitric Oxide, the Molecule of Life” published in 2010.
Noni is safe. I have been taking it for over four years now for heart disease and hypertension. A lot of Filipinos are taking it, too. Bottled products are being marketed in Hong Kong. There has been no complaint about safety from consumers there. What we are going to test is its effectiveness against cancer.
The experimental design can be patterned after the Salk vaccine research, or after that of the “Trials to Assess Chelation Therapy” (TACT). This is a double blind randomized with control study that has shown that chelation therapy is safe and effective for heart disease.
There was no difficulty in the conduct of TACT. The chelation formulation developed by chelationist was used. It is similar to the use of noni; being natural there is no need for chemical or drug formulations.
For the final trial some 1.8 American children were given shots of the Salk vaccine. For the TACT study, some 1,780 volunteers were administered with the chelation solution. TACT went through about ten years; launched in 2002 and results announced in 2012. Conducted by the National Institutes of Health, it cost US$ 30 million.
This cancer research will not be expensive because the experimental material, like noni capsule, or tea, or juice will be used. The Philippines now has the technology to process noni that abounds in this country.
Treatment of cancer is straightforward: kill the cancer cells. This is done by free radicals. Adriamycin, one chemo drug, produces a lot of free radicals, singlet oxygen (Pressman, A, and S. Buff. Glutathione: The Ultimate Antioxidant. 1998). Free radicals kill cancer cells. Unfortunately, free radicals also damage or kill healthy cells that they hit along the way. That is why chemo when given in overdose causes cancer. For this reason, the delivery of free radicals to cancer cells should be precise. But that is easier said than done. Free radicals from chemo drugs are highly indiscriminate. However, conventional medicine will not tell you about free radicals in chemo drugs.
What is sad or fatal in the use of chemo is the fact that it produces singlet oxygen. The human body does not have a built-in antidote. Our body has built-in antioxidants: superoxide dismutase (SOD), glutathione peroxidase, glutathione reductase, catalase. All of these counter free radicals and ROS -- except singlet oxygen. The only antioxidant that can neutralize singlet oxygen is vitamin A, or carotene (Cranton, E. MD. Bypassing Bypass. Updated second edition, 1995). And we do not usually take vitamin A or eat carrot or colored fruits and vegetables (red, orange, violet). Of course, conventional medicine doctors do not prescribe carotene for chemo patients because they snub free radicals and ROS as causes of cancer.
Like chlorophyll of plant leaves that absorb heat from the sun, carotene absorbs heat from chemo drugs. This heat of at least 1216 kcal/mol reverses the spin of one unpaired electron of molecular oxygen and turns it into singlet oxygen. This is hazardous because it can grab two electrons at the same while other free radicals and ROS can grab only one electron at a time..
How does noni kill cancer cells? Noni contains arginine. When acted upon by the enzyme nitric oxide synthase, arginine produces nitric oxide which is a free radical. There are three kinds of nitric oxide: endothelium nitric oxide, neuron nitric oxide, inducible nitric oxide (iNO). iNO is mediated by the macrophages. That is, the macrophages, components of the immune system, uses iNO like bullets (Cranton, E., MD. 1995). Macrophages shoot foreign bodies, including cancer cells, with iNO.
(I have a Hub, “How Nitric Oxide from Noni, a Medicinal Plant, Controls Cancer”).
There is another way by which to deliver iNO: gene therapy. It has been found successful in mice. Only a big pharmaceutical company can develop it for use in human beings. It is highly probable that gene therapy will be costly to consumers. I have a Hub on this topic. "Better than chemotherapy in controlling cancer: gene therapy."
The cancer research foundation can be managed by representatives of donors all over the world.
Why do we have to depend on donations? It is more likely that the Philippine government will not allocate a budget because the major decision makers in government are steeped in premises of conventional medicine or germ theory of disease.
We want donations to be used in cancer research with free radical theories of disease as framework.