Home > Uncategorized > We Can’t Afford to Cure Cancer

We Can’t Afford to Cure Cancer

by Bill Sardi

LewRocwell.com (June 07 2016)

Someone has said there are just too many jobs in the pursuit of a cancer cure to allow any therapy to be proven and put into practice.  Recognize the nation is dotted with cancer research centers that hold billions of dollars of debt.  For example, the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, Washington holds $176 million of debt . Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York, the nation’s cancer research center, holds $1.9 billion of debt.  A cancer cure would leave research centers like these on the hook for loans that could not possibly be paid back.

Better for cancer research centers to live off the $4.95 billion of research grants that get divvied out by the National Institutes of Health each year than to find a cure.

In light of this revelation, the public may be better served by private enterprise that is not reliant on public funding to find a cure for cancer.

While Facebook co-founder Sean Parker has pledged $250 million towards a “moon shot” attempt to cure cancer, donating his money to six cancer research centers, another entrepreneur operating clinics he founded in Austria and Germany is way ahead of the pack having successfully treated thousands of patients, though he had to resurrect a dismissed cancer therapy from its grave, undergo closure of his company by health authorities and incur severe criticism to do it.

New Era of Immunotherapy

Before I get to that compelling story, let me say cancer therapy is undergoing a massive change.  The slash-burn-poison era of cancer therapy may be over.  The age of cancer immunotherapy has begun.  And I’m not the person saying this.  Many cancer researchers are saying immunotherapy is already replacing chemo.  Just how much longer conventional oncologists can continue to subject their patients to harsh of cancer treatments is unknown.

An article entitled: “Cancer Immunotherapy: The Beginning Of The End Of Cancer”, says: “the tide has finally changed and immunotherapy has become a clinically validated treatment for cancer cancers”.

The futility of chemotherapy is revealed by the very fact toxic anti-cancer drugs impair a type of white blood cell known as natural killer cells, thus limiting the cancer patient’s chances for a cure altogether.

The clock is counting down on chemotherapy as immunotherapy is already producing long-term remissions for some types of cancer, particularly non-solid tumors.  Toxic chemotherapy finally comes to the end of its product life cycle.

The goal of cancer immunotherapy is to stimulate a patient’s immune system to recognize cancer cells as foreign and attack them.

The Four White Blood Cells that Kill Cancer

Cancer immunologists are presently unleashing four types of white blood cells against cancer:

1. Neutrophils, which produced “cancer-proof mice” at Duke University.  Neutrophils track down, dock up next to tumor cells and blow them up with a burst of oxygen free radicals.  However, a trial was proposed to glean activated neutrophils from healthy patients and instill them in cancer patients, but it never materialized.  It became apparent healthy young subjects exhibit the same immunity from cancer in summer months as laboratory mice bred for their ability to produce neutrophils.  This strongly suggests sunlight exposure in summer produces sufficient amounts of vitamin D to reduce cancer risk.

However, instead of launching a vitamin D trial, vitamin-averse researchers ludicrously proposed the removal of activated neutrophils from healthy subjects and instillation in cancer patients because it needed a profitable business model to be successful.  What can be concluded is that any natural and inexpensive cancer therapy will be summarily dismissed.

2. T-cells are successfully being harvested from cancer patients, grown in numbers and then activated and instilled back into the patient to produce long-lasting cures for non-solid tumors like leukemia (cancer of the blood) and lymphoma (cancer of the lymph system).

3. Natural killer cell therapy involves NK cells that inject toxins directly into cancer cells.  This is considered the most direct way to conquer cancer because NK cells do not depend on the development of antibodies like T-cells do.

4. Macrophages that literally digest or engulf roaming cancer cells and are abundant in the environment surrounding solid tumors have long been considered for use in cancer therapy.  Since most immunotherapies for cancer have had limited success in solid tumors, focus on macrophages has been intense.

Macrophages (pronunciation) are not all beneficial.  There is a Janus face to macrophages.

One type of macrophage actually induces biological chaos at tumor sites – uncontrolled inflammation and suppression of tumor-fighting white blood cells.  Tumor cells escape what is called “immune surveillance” via inflammation and produce immune suppressors.  Out-of-control macrophages even facilitate the spread (metastasis) of cancer.

Reckless Macrophages

Reckless macrophages via their ability to wreak havoc by inducing uncontrolled inflammation not only interfere with the immune system’s ability to ward off cancer but also can, for example, induce inflammation in the lungs due to a viral infection that fills the lungs with fluid, with a potentially deadly outcome.  Out of control macrophages are also a major cause of morbidity and mortality in childhood arthritis.

These uncontrolled macrophages are responsible for legal blindness induced by wet macular degeneration, a condition where the visual center of the eye (macula) leaks fluid or produces new blood vessels (angiogenesis) in an attempt to deliver oxygen to eye tissues.

One group of cancer researchers describe macrophages as “unwitting accomplices in cancer malignancy”.  Another report characterizes macrophages as “corrupt policemen in cancer-related inflammation”. A damning revelation here is that conventional chemotherapy can in many instances inhibit the anti-tumor properties of macrophages.

Dietary Factors Control Macrophage-induced Inflammation

Dietary factors may determine whether macrophages are cancer killing or not.  For example, it has been demonstrated that high intake of salt converts macrophages into devilish villains that impair the ability of T-cells to control cancer. Salt is highly alkaline (so much for the alkaline theory of cancer).

A high-fat diet also predisposes macrophages to become inflammatory.

What can entrain macrophages to seek out and eradicate tumor cells without inducing inflammation and suppression of the very immune system that is attempting to do the same thing?

Enter Vitamin D Binding Protein

Enter vitamin D binding protein, a molecule that facilitates the transport of vitamin D throughout the body.  When two enzymes (galactosidase and sialidase) knock off two sugar-like molecules off of vitamin D binding protein, this becomes a unique molecular entity called Gc protein-macrophage activating factor, or gcMAF.

The discovery of the process by which gcMAF is produced was published in 1991 and 1993 by Nobuto Yamamoto, then a noted immunologist at Temple University in Philadelphia.

Dr Yamamoto comes from a prestigious background having been appointed a full professor of microbiology and immunology at Hahnemann University School of Medicine.

It was Dr Yamamoto who noted that gcMAF greatly enhances the cancer ingesting properties of macrophages by three- to seven-fold.

In 2003 Dr Yamamoto also noted that gcMAF increased tumoricidal activity without releasing two known activators of inflammation- tumor necrosis factor (“TNF”) and nitric oxide (“NO”). GcMAF was like taking wild horses and saddling them to work together as a team against cancer.  Were cancer biologists paying attention?

Just ten to fifty picograms (a trillionth of a gram) of gcMAF was demonstrated to stimulate the activity of macrophages by seven- to nine-fold in laboratory mice.

Dr Yamamoto Fails to Carry the Torch for gcMAF

Dr Yamamoto advanced further into his research with gcMAF by administering this blood protein in minuscule amounts to laboratory mice that had tumor cells implanted.  A single injection of gcMAF resulted in an average survival time of 21 days (one mouse survived beyond sixty days) whereas untreated mice survived an average of thirteen days.  Dr Yamamoto described this curative therapy as “a consequence of sustained macrophage activation by inflammation resulting from the macrophage tumoricidal process”.

Are Nagalase Enzyme Levels a Marker of gcMAF activity?

Dr Yamamoto took another step forward in 1996 by instilling gcMAF into a lab dish with macrophages taken from cancer patients.  Dr Yamamoto reported that an enzyme is known as nagalase (aka alpha-N-acetylgalactosaminidase) was blocking the conversion of vitamin D binding protein to gcMAF. Later Dr Yamamoto reported nagalase enzyme levels correlate with the size of tumors.

Here was Dr Yamamoto pioneering cancer immunotherapy two decades before it is now being given the spotlight in cancer therapy.  Dr Yamamoto’s work was also validated by other researchers in the field. Yet there was no impetus to advance it from the laboratory bench to the bedside of cancer patients.

Then Dr Yamamoto embarked upon a series of published human studies conducted in Japan and published in 2008 to demonstrate gcMAF had remarkable ability to inhibit nagalase and reduce the size of tumors and produce tumor-free individuals.  Dr Yamamoto’s gcMAF was positively reported to rescue patients battling prostate, breast, lung and colon cancer.

It was then, in 2008 that I was alerted by a laboratory researcher, Timothy Hubbell, that I should examine the published works of Dr Yamamoto dealing with gcMAF and cancer.  I published an online report about Dr Yamamoto’s seemingly remarkable discoveries and wondered why the research community wasn’t paying attention.   My report drew worldwide attention and broke the story to the public.

Unexpectedly, Dr Yamamoto was not pleased with issuance of the report.  He claimed only his gcMAF was safe to use.  But when asked what plans he had to market it, he provided nebulous answers.  I arranged for a major worldwide Fortune-500 company to enter into discussions about licensing his gcMAF, but he never responded to that offer.  Cancer patients called him frantically begging for gcMAF, to no avail.  Dr Yamamoto advised me to get a job writing about other topics.

By 2014 the editors of a cancer journal retracted Dr Yamamoto’s report involving gcMAF and nagalase in breast cancer patients citing irregularities in documentation for institutional review board approval.

Retraction Watch pilloried Dr Yamamoto, discrediting his work completely.  Inexplicably, the more than ninety-year old researcher did not respond or comment about the retraction.  Was Dr Yamamoto guilty of fabricating or was he being silenced?

But, as it is pointed out by the besmirched clinic in Europe that is administering gcMAF to cancer patients, there are 142 scientists that have penned research papers regarding gcMAF. If Dr Yamamoto produced fraudulent research, then what are all these other research scientists doing studying it?

Since 1998 Dr Yamamoto works at a tax-exempt foundation he established, the Socrates Institute in Philadelphia, which appears to be a very modest operation. From 1993 thru 2015 he filed for thirteen patents involving gcMAF.

Yamamoto’s Studies Questioned

In 2014 The Anticancer Fund pf Belgium delved into the human gcMAF studies conducted under Dr Yamamoto.  They have a Big Pharma director on their board, appear to be funded by Big Pharma, and put forward entirely fraudulent science to get two of Yamamoto’s papers retracted.   They report that institutional review boards for these trials “do not exist”.  Dr Yamamoto’s co-authors “could not be found”.  They claim naturally occurring gcMAF in cancer patients is about four milligrams/liter of blood, “making the 100 nanograms (used by Yamamoto) meaningless”.

But were researchers in Japan clamming up, cowering from pressure that would surely come and ruin their careers?

These Belgian researchers demanded “adequate randomized controlled trials”, full well knowing they would be unethical.  You can’t ethically leave cancer patients to take placebos and die.  GcMAF must be compared against existing conventional therapy, and not chemo that degrades it.   I often remind skeptics that insulin, penicillin, aspirin, nitroglycerin, digoxin and most vaccines came into common use without long-term double-blind placebo-controlled studies.

In the modern pharmaceutical world, drugs are approved if they marginally improve markers of disease, not the disease itself.  For example, statin drugs are widely prescribed for cholesterol reduction but have never been shown to significantly reduce mortality, though they do marginally reduce the risk for a non-mortal heart attack (by three percent over five years).  Cancer drugs are approved if they reduce the size of a tumor by fifty percent in thirty days regardless of whether they improve survival or not.

Searching for an Alternative Hypothesis

Another troubling report published in 2009 probed into the mechanism that converts vitamin D binding protein to gcMAF.  The claim is that an enzyme, nagalase, degrades gcMAF in cancer patients.

In fact, these researchers show there is a significant amount of the precursor for gcMAF in blood serum of cancer patients (about four milligrams per liter), which “makes it unlikely there is a depleted gcMAF precursor in cancer patients”. These researchers say “alternative hypotheses must be considered to explain the relative inability of patient serum to activate macrophages”.

But then again, we refer to the previously mentioned paper published in PLos One in 2010 where it was shown that gcMAF exhibits “a direct and potent effect upon tumor cells in the absence of macrophages”.  GcMAF is taking us on a scientific roller coaster.  GcMAF exhibits very potent ability to inhibit tumor cell growth directly.   Was this the alternative hypothesis gcMAF researchers were searching for?

Another research study, authored by researchers at Harvard Medical School and the University of Kentucky, showed gcMAF produces “strong inhibitory activity on prostate tumor cells independent of macrophage activation”.  By the way, that study was funded by a Department of Defense grant.

Should gcMAF be renamed DNMAF – direct non-macrophage activating factor?

The unexpected occurred in another recent study.  Macrophages were instilled into a dish of breast cancer cells and nothing happened.  Tumor cells were unaltered.  But when human breast cancer cells were cultured with macrophages that had been previously activated by gcMAF, these macrophages surrounded the breast cancer cells and induced their death.  This was anticipated, but the following experiment wasn’t.

Even more striking was when gcMAF was added to a lab dish with breast cancer cells only (no macrophages).  Researchers at the University of Firenze, Italy, showed gcMAF-treated tumor cells reverted back to healthy cells! This direct reversion of tumor cells to a healthy state without macrophages should have provoked a top-to-bottom re-think on the dynamic mechanisms exhibited by gcMAF.   To view macrophages turning cancer cells back to healthy cells click https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RW5F9eLUMzc.

Maybe gcMAF had little to do with nagalase levels.  But researchers could not rule out that the dramatic reduction in breast cancer cells observed in a lab dish emanated from the ability of gcMAF to inhibit angiogenesis.

GcMAF and Angiogenesis

Angiogenesis (pronounced an-gee-oh-gen-esis) is a biological phenomenon where blood vessels near oxygen-starved tissues develop new tributaries to nourish tissues with oxygen and other nutrients.  In this case, angiogenesis facilitates tumor growth by provision of nutrients.

GcMAF has been shown to inhibit the sprouting of new blood vessels that feed tumors .

Researchers also demonstrated vitamin D3, the natural form of vitamin D, works synergistically with gcMAF.

These researchers showed gcMAF has multiple biological activities, notably its interaction with the cell surface receptor for vitamin D, that could be responsible for its seven anti-cancer effects.  GcMAF’s ability to activate macrophages may be overemphasized.  It exerts other powerful biological actions to quell cancer.

This compelling experiment involving the vitamin D cell surface receptor was performed by the very same researchers affiliated with Immuno Biotech Ltd, the maligned company in Europe that makes gcMAF (more below).

And let’s not overlook the fact that vitamin D itself, a synergistic co-factor with gcMAF, activate two other classes of cancer-killing white blood cells – neutrophils and natural killer cells.

Attempts to Make a Synthetic gcMAF

If gcMAF were an outright fraud, then why are research centers attempting to develop look-alike molecules (analogues) to make into patentable drugs?  Efforts to synthetically produce molecular mimics of gcMAF date back to 2002. Other researchers reported their attempt to produce a patentable gcMAF synthetic in 2006.

David Noakes, Uncloaked

That businessman mentioned in the opening page of this report, who has founded the gcMAF clinics in Europe, is tech entrepreneur David Noakes.  His broad-based team of researchers has, like Dr Yamamoto, shown that gcMAF decreases nagalase levels in patients with advanced-stage cancer.  As nagalase activity diminished with weekly gcMAF injections, patients experienced improvement.

Mr Noakes’ company, Immuno Biotech, sponsored another study that demonstrated how gcMAF complexes with olive oil (oleic acid) to further stimulate its immune-therapeutic effect. This curative effect was visibly observed in ultrasound images of human cancer that confirmed reduction in tumor size from 8.7% to 49.2% within one to four weeks of gcMAF/oleic acid treatment among humans with Stage-Four cancer.

This answers the criticism lodged at Dr Yamamoto that he never provided evidence of tumor shrinkage, only evidence of reduced nagalase activity, and he only chose patients with early-stage cancer. David Noakes finally provided the evidence Dr Yamamoto couldn’t produce.  The absence of side effects was also noted.

Immuno Biotech Provides Evidence for Examination

Immuno Biotech has 33 scientific research papers currently published on the mechanisms and results of gcMAF therapy for cancer, autism and other disorders.   There are now over 200 scientists who have published over 120 research papers on gcMAF.  Its website cites an eighty percent response rate (reduction in tumor size for Stage One and Stage Two cancer).

In their experience at Immuno Biotech, late-stage cancer may require up to eighteen months of treatment to become cancer free.

Immuno Biotech asks all of its cancer patients to adhere to a no-added sugar/ low carbohydrate diet and to supplement their diet with 10,000 units of vitamin D.

Typical experiences of individual patients who have undergone gcMAF treatment during the years 2011 to 2013 are also provided online.

As a human protein, GcMAF has no side effects.

David Noakes can be heard delivering an oral presentation on YouTube about Immuno Biotech’s gcMAF cancer therapy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAfS8VUDT-g

According to information obtained online, Immuno Biotech currently employs five doctors at its clinics.   GcMAF is injected directly into the tumor using ultrasound imaging.  Mr Noakes’ clinics generally provide gcMAF for a period of three to four weeks and then patients are sent home to receive it on their own.  In general by the first week a 25% reduction in tumor size is achieved (range eight to forty percent reduction).

He says his company has supplied gcMAF now to 11,000 patients.  He also supplies 100 clinics and 250 doctors around the world with genuine gcMAF.  His company also offers an improved dropper form of gcMAF.

Recognize, it is difficult for a company like Immuno Biotech to provide data on cure rates since five-year survival is the gold standard.

Is This a Health Quack?

A distant assessment does not reveal David Noakes to be acting like the health quack he is portrayed to be online.   In fact, all of the evidence demanded of Dr Nobuto Yamamoto, David Noakes seems to have provided – mechanism studies, survival data, ultrasound images of shrinking tumor volume that correlate with gcMAF therapy.

Authorities Close In

Despite his transparency, David Noakes has undergone considerable scrutiny by authorities.  Shamefully, that oversight was coming from a country whose cancer survival rate is the worst in western Europe.

Where are the Dead Bodies?

As we ask in the natural medicine business, “where are the dead bodies?”  With all of the clamor about gcMAF being branded as an unlicensed health product that poses “a significant risk to health”, it is difficult to find a cancer patient who feels he was bilked by Mr Noakes.

While the Medicine and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (“MHRA”), an agency bereft with corruption itself, raised concerns whether the gcMAF product is sterile and free from contamination, no product-related infections were reported. Mr Noakes explains his company’s gcMAF product goes through 22 steps of purification. Batch testing for sterility by an independent laboratory are reported to show perfect sterility for five years.

Hundreds of people in Guernsey applied pressure on their doctors and politicians to maintain gcMAF therapy but it was banned on the isle Guernsey in February of 2015 anyway.

Health authorities demand gcMAF be synthetically produced and undergo drug testing, something that would, according to Mr Noakes, cost around $20 million and take five years to gain approval.  Immuno Biotech’s laboratories have made two forms of a synthetic gcMAF, but human drug trials are not likely to happen, says Mr Noakes.

In The Guernsey Press, a letter (abridged) to the editor read:

 

Mike13768

July 18 2014 7:32 pm

Up until recently I was a complete skeptic about Gcmaf, however events in the last few weeks have made me reconsider my position.

I have recently met with several people who have been told that they have terminal cancer and there were no avenues left for their treatment.

These people have taken Gcmaf and also have changed their lifestyle and have fantastic results.  One lady who was diagnosed as terminal is now completely clear, whilst another gentleman has had his tumor shrunk by over fifty percent.

I was at David Noakes’ house two weeks ago along with over eighty other people there, deputies from the local cancer charities and people who were currently receiving treatment.  What strikes me about this treatment is the conspiracy of silence about it.  For example I know of a local cancer charity whose board members will not actively talk about it for fear of upsetting certain other board members.

I am also aware that the local clinicians refuse to acknowledge this treatment for fear of upsetting Health & Social Services Department (“HSSD”).  People who are in hospices are not made aware of this potential treatment and let’s be brutal about this if you are dying what have you got to lose.

I urge the cancer charities to acknowledge this is your job is to promote treatments to get rid of this disease.  If charities fail to acknowledge this, the question begs to be asked “WHY”, what are they hiding from?

Guernsey Press, July 18 2014

 

Deaths of Researchers Surrounds gcMAF

This report will not delve into the unexplained deaths of clinicians and researchers associated with gcMAF except to say that early on in 2009, Narasimha Swamy, PhD of Brown University, who had knowledge how to produce gcMAF, died suddenly at age 39 without a history of any health problems.  He authored and co-authored papers on gcMAF. It was an untimely if not a suspicious death.  Did Dr Swamy plan to bring gcMAF back to his homeland of India where generic drug makers would distribute it globally without regulatory approvals?  Who knows?

Health product licensing and manufacturing oversight have become roadblocks to innovation, not assurances a product is safe and effective.  The public can see through this now.

Culling the Population

In the UK the National Health Service is billions of dollars in debt.  Hospitals there have resorted to withdrawing drinking water from bedridden patients, which is the perfect way to cull this patient population, as it leaves no fingerprints.  According to one news report, 12,000 are “killed” annually in British hospitals due to dehydration. Elderly patients report they have averted dehydration by drinking water from flower vases.

A more horrific report delivered to the Royal Society of Medicine in London by a leading professor of medicine claims 130,000 patients annually in the National Health Service system have been placed on a “death pathway” instead of a  “care pathway”.

It’s not just physician greed nor Big Pharma profiteering, it’s something much more ghastly that keeps cancer from being cured.  Health systems worldwide are underfunded.  Health systems can’t afford a cancer cure.  For the good of insolvent retirement and health trust funds and life insurance companies the elderly must die on time.  That is the hidden determinant that blocks adoption of any cancer cure.

For those who wish to learn more about gcMAF, Dr Tim Smith has written a free online book on the topic: http://gcmaf.timsmithmd.com/.

_____

The Best of Bill Sardi: https://www.lewrockwell.com/author/bill-sardi/

Bill Sardi is a frequent writer on health and political topics. His health writings can be found at http://www.naturalhealthlibrarian.com.

Copyright (c) 2016 Bill Sardi Word of Knowledge Agency, San Dimas, California.

Links: The original version of this article, at the URL below, contains many links to further information not included here.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/06/bill-sardi/cant-afford-cure-cancer/

Advertisements
Categories: Uncategorized
  1. No comments yet.
  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: