• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo

Cancer Protocols? Especially Lung Cancer


  • Please log in to reply
135 replies to this topic

#31 tham

  • Guest
  • 1,406 posts
  • 498
  • Location:Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Posted 12 September 2009 - 08:12 PM

If he is taking the American scullcap, Scutellaria lateriflora,
that has little anticancer activity. This is used more for anxiety
and promoting sleep, especially with valerian, passion flower and hops
in many formulas.

S. barbata or baicalensis would be the ones to take if he has NSCLC.

S. baicalensis is also called Chinese scullcap. Its anticancer
properties are largely due to its flavonoids, baicalin, baicalein,
wogonin and chrysin.

http://www.ncbi.nlm....l=pubmed_docsum

http://www.ncbi.nlm....l=pubmed_docsum

http://www.ncbi.nlm....l=pubmed_docsum


A549 is a NSCLC line.

http://www.ncbi.nlm....l=pubmed_docsum

#32 Mortuorum

  • Guest
  • 91 posts
  • 24
  • Location:Brooklyn, NY

Posted 12 September 2009 - 08:26 PM

I was considering making a Curcumin formulation in the near future to help with absorption, but I would like to read about the research you mentioned above. Do you happen to have a link or name of the study?

thanks
A
[/quote]


Hello Anthony,

I was just curious, how has that research data affected your perspective regarding Curcumin and the development of a supplement for RevGenetics?


Best,

M.

Edited by Mortuorum, 12 September 2009 - 08:27 PM.


sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this MEDICINES advertising spot to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#33 zawy

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 291 posts
  • 46
  • Location:USA

Posted 13 September 2009 - 05:29 PM

Selenium Toxicity
Selenium is toxic in a large portion of the population at about 5,000 mcg/day if taken chronically, maybe requiring years of exposure. Symptoms are garlic breath, hair falling out, brittle nails, nausea, and nervousness. As little as 2,000 mcg/day may have negative effects in some people after a year. 750 mcg/day forever is considered safe. The most sensitive person out of 13 had negative effects after taking 30,000 mcg/day for 11 days. One random person taking 20,000 mcg for 70 days showed no noticeable effects.

Effect on NSCLC Lung Cancer, sept 2009 research
50% of H157 (squamous cell) died in 20 hour when exposed to 5 uM selenite in test tube. At 50 uM, 70% died. Another form of NSLC had only 10% die. It works when cysteine is present extracellularly, causing a reducing solution, possibly turning selenite to selenide for easy transport inside. Selenite works best on cancer cells that transport cystine inside the cell so that outside the cysteine/cystine ratio is high (reducing). The difference in effectiveness of selenite appears to be based only on how well it is transported inside cancer cells. Cancers that are resistant to chemo are less resistant to selenite. Combing chemo and selenite will be good in some cases and completely negate the effectiveness of both compounds in others. This seems to clear up a lot of confusion of the past 5 years. See quote below from the bought paper.
http://www.pnas.org/.../11400.abstract

Amount to take for Cancer

I have not yet look up absorption and excretion of sodium selenite. It would be good if someone could do that. Using 100% absorption and 100% retention, 3,750 mcg sodium selenite will result in 5 uM in 5 liters of blood. This is exactly the protocol described by tham's report of someone using it with tremendous success. To have 5 uM distributed equally in a 70 kg solution, it would require 13,000 mcg, only 4 days if all is absorbed and somehow none were excreted. 3,750 mcg seems very safe for a month, even a year if you're comparing it to terminal cancer. It is actually given to SIRS patients by I.V. Ironically, SIRS may result from chemo. So someone might have some interesting data out there already on using selenite in cancer patients. Personally, I would try 10,000 mcg for 2 weeks, then switch to 5,000 mcg until I thought I might be seeing negative effects. Selenite pills are about 0.5% sodium selenite.


September 2009 article
"Drug-resistant tumor cells have been shown to be particularly sensitive to selenite toxicity, with growth-inhibiting effects observed at low concentrations harmless to cell type– or patient-matched normal cells...Selenite (SeO3) efficiently inhibits the growth of malignant cells and studies suggest an inverse relationship between resistance to cytotoxic drugs and sensitivity to selenite (SeO3) (1, 2). A major mechanism of selenite cytotoxicity is thought to be the generation of oxidative stress through intracellular redox cycling of the selenium metabolite selenide with oxygen and cellular thiols, producing nonstoichiometric amounts of superoxide and cellular disulfides. The induction of oxidative stress and consequent apoptosis has been demonstrated in numerous cancer cell lines (2–8), but why this occurs only in malignant cells at easily achievable selenium plasma concentrations remains unclear....early findings clearly demonstrated that cancer cells enrich selenium in vivo. These findings, combined with current knowledge of selenite’s toxic effects on malignant cells, raise the possibility of a cancer-specific high-affinity selenium
uptake mechanism that might explain cancer-specific selenite cytotoxicity at therapeutic selenite concentrations (uM range).....The availability of cysteine is the limiting step in GSH synthesis (13), and thus high cysteine
availability is also important in the cellular defense against oxidative stress and may aid drug resistance. In extracellular plasma, cysteine levels are low (10 uM), and cystine levels are almost 10-fold higher (14), giving xc
-expressing cancer cells access to a larger pool of cysteine....Uptake was measured in cells treated with a dose of 5 uM for 5 h to explore whether selenium accumulation preceded cytotoxicity. The dose was chosen to be suitable for [lung cancer] cells with varying sensitivity to selenite, including highly toxic (H157), borderline toxic (U2020), and nontoxic (H611). Selenium accumulation was greatest in the H157 cells (280 +/- 6 ng/mg total protein), less in the U2020 cells (60 +/- 9 ng/mg total protein), and undetectable in the H611 cells. These results correspond closely to the toxicity at the given doses and suggest that selenite toxicity is determined by the level of selenium accumulation in cells. ... State. To explore the connection between selenium uptake and the extracellular redox state, we measured the total production of extracellular thiols from the cells over time (Fig. 1A). Extracellular thiol production was highest in the H157 cells, peaking at 110 uM at 10 h, and was lower in the U2020 cells, peaking at 40 uM at 20 h. Production in the H611 cells did not differ significantly from that seen in the control growth medium (10 uM). Extracellular thiol production showed a remarkable correlation with selenium uptake measured previously (R2  0.997) (Fig. 1B), suggesting a strong relationship between a reductive microenvironment and high-affinity selenium uptake. To verify this relationship and its connection to cytotoxicity, we artificially redox-modulated the extracellular compartment and treated the cells with 5 Mselenite. Viability measured at 20 h was used as an endpoint. Extracellular reduction through inclusion of the cell-impermeable reductantsGSHor Tris(2-carboxyethyl)phosphine (TCEP) led to increased selenite toxicity at equal concentrations
(75 uM) (Fig. 2A). Conversely, 500 uM 55-dithiobis-(2-nitrobenzoic acid) (DTNB) used as a cell-impermeable oxidant or
thiol scavenger protected the cells from any toxic effects of selenite compared with the DTNB control. Additional experiments also showed that the presence of DTNB increased the IC-50 for selenite from 4 uM to 40 uM in the sensitive H157 cells....The results clearly validate that the innate extracellular reductive capacity is crucial for selenite cytotoxicity and is mediated by an extracellular thiol–dependent high-affinity uptake mechanism....To verify that inhibition of cysteine secretion protects cells from selenite cytotoxicity, we treated cells with MSG and selenite. We found that MSG protected the cells from any toxic effects of selenite, an effect that could be reestablished by artificial reduction of the extracellular compartment...A significant fraction of intracellular cysteine is resecreted into the extracellular compartment by MRPs, causing a reductive extracellular microenvironment. Extracellular reduction of selenite leads to a high-affinity uptake of a reduced form of selenite, possibly selenide,
causing selenium accumulation and toxicity."

"In this work, viability measurements in different lung cancer cell lines showed that selenite was more effective compared to three different conventional cytotoxic drugs."
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/18405881

"Selenium compounds show much promise in the prevention of prostate and other human cancers. Various selenium chemical forms have been shown to differ widely in their anticancer properties....By contrast sodium selenite caused phosphorylation of p53 serines 20, 37 and 46 known to mediate apoptosis. "
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/15274301

"Our results demonstrate pronounced selective selenium-mediated apoptosis in therapy-resistant cells and suggest that redox regulation through the thioredoxin system is an important target for cancer therapy."
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/15037203

Selenite used in combination with cancer chemotherapeutic agents to reduce side effects...
http://www.springerl...30373r56872512/

"inclusion of selenite in a chemotherapeutic protocol can result in a significant enhancement of the efficacy of cisplatin in suppressing the growth of human ovarian tumor xenografts."
http://cat.inist.fr/...&cpsidt=1140006

"Selenium (Se) compounds such as selenite are toxic to cancer cells; they inhibit growth, reduce mobility, and induce apoptosis. The molecular mechanism(s) for these effects are not fully understood but appear to involve multiple molecular targets."
http://www.aacrmeeti...ct/2005/1/207-b

"Selenium (Se) has been shown in clinical trials to be effective in reducing the risk of different cancers including lung cancer. Consequently, the mechanism of this anticancer effect has been under active investigation. Although it is clear that Se induces apoptosis of cancer cells, the regulatory mechanism(s) of this effect is yet to be understood. "
http://aacrmeetingab...ct/2004/1/316-c

#34 tham

  • Guest
  • 1,406 posts
  • 498
  • Location:Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Posted 13 September 2009 - 06:21 PM

I remember reading, I think in Leslie Kenton's "Ageless Ageing",
that vitamin C inactivates selenite. Thus it may be preferable
to take the sodium or magnesium ascorbate and not ascorbic acid,
or to take the two at least four hours apart.

" Sodium selenite has been found to be inactivated by acids in a
composition with a pH of less than about pH 2.75. The acidity
of the composition plus the high acidity of the stomach of pH
1.2 to 1.5 retards the absorption of the sodium selenite into
the blood stream. Ascorbic acid (Vitamin C) has been found to
mask the effects of sodium selenite. "

http://www.freepaten...om/4668515.html

#35 tham

  • Guest
  • 1,406 posts
  • 498
  • Location:Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Posted 13 September 2009 - 06:24 PM

Then again, combining ascorbic acid and sodium selenite
fights gastric cancer.

http://www.ncbi.nlm....l=pubmed_docsum

#36 tham

  • Guest
  • 1,406 posts
  • 498
  • Location:Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Posted 13 September 2009 - 07:01 PM

Vitamin C and sodium selenite prevents gastric cancer by
reducing H.pylori-induce oxidative damage.

http://www.ncbi.nlm....l=pubmed_docsum


Selenium against osteoporosis.

" When sodium selenite was given together with vitamins E and C
to the osteoporosis model rabbits, the long bone tissue had
almost the same structure as in normal rabbits ..... "

http://www.ncbi.nlm....l=pubmed_docsum


Selenium against Parkinson's disease.

" Selenium was found to be successful in upregulating the antioxidant
status and lowering the dopamine loss, and functional recovery
returned close to the baseline dose-dependently. "

http://www.ncbi.nlm....l=pubmed_docsum

http://www3.intersci...870791/PDFSTART

http://www3.intersci...in.html,ftx_abs


Cell Death Caused by Selenium Deficiency and Protective
Effect of Antioxidants.

http://www.jbc.org/c...p;pmid=12888577


Selenite reactivates silenced genes by modifying DNA methylation
and histones in prostate cancer cells.

http://carcin.oxford...ract/29/11/2175


Selenium spares ascorbate and alpha-tocopherol in cultured liver
cell lines under oxidant stress.

http://www.ncbi.nlm....l=pubmed_docsum


Inhibition of telomerase activity in endometrial cancer cells
by selenium-cisplatin conjugate despite suppression of its
DNA-damaging activity by sodium ascorbate.

http://www3.intersci...512957/abstract



" ...... vitamin C combines with sodium selenite and may make the
selenium formed by this interaction less absorbable and possibly
more toxic. So for improved function, it is wise to take selenium in
the absence of vitamin C and along with vitamin E. "

http://www.healthy.n...Id=2068&xcntr=5

#37 zawy

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 291 posts
  • 46
  • Location:USA

Posted 13 September 2009 - 07:07 PM

In this thread I first argued for oral vit C in response to the other poster. Then I pointed out that since selenite acts by generating ROS (even when p53 is de-activated by the cancer), then it might be good to limit the protective effects of oral viit C. IV vit works by H2O2 oxidation, but it might still work to protect the tumor cells from selenite-generated ROS. So it it's not clear that selenite / vit C iv will be a good combo punch. My guess is that selenite with the mushrooms might be good. Maybe alternating vit C / selenite weeks could work.

Low dose sodium selenite absorbed 73% in infants and retained 64% of that after 3 days.
http://cat.inist.fr/...cpsidt=13407383

Similar in rats:
http://journals.camb...f42f347c677729f

But not fish:
http://content.karge....asp?Doi=176985

As an estimate the infant info could be approximated as 50% loss of the 73% absorbed remaining after 4 days. So you have only about 1/3 remaining after 4 days. This confirms the dose I said i would take in my previous post.

#38 zawy

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 291 posts
  • 46
  • Location:USA

Posted 13 September 2009 - 07:33 PM

Men taking selenium 300 mcg/d in food resulted in 180 ug/L in 90 days, which is about 1 uM. 5 times more would be the target of 5 uM. So long term, 1,500 ug/d in food would be ideal for killing cancer cells. 3 oz brazil nuts per day. Higher doses do have a more positive effect, but from the previous study referenced above, it seems you have to take ten times as much to kill twice as many cancer cells. Ten times as much is clearly in the toxic range. Higher plasma levels will mean faster excretion and pill form will mean less absorption, so 3,000 ug/d still seems like a good long term plan that is relatively very safe for someone with cancer that has a 20% mortality rate. I would not want to waste the first 90 days, so starting out on 20,000 ug/day for the first week and then 10,000 ug/d for the rest of the month might be good.

http://jn.nutrition....ull/133/11/3434

#39 zawy

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 291 posts
  • 46
  • Location:USA

Posted 14 September 2009 - 12:58 AM

Methyl jasmonate looks good in pubmed. The inhaler to get it to the blood is interesting. Strange how the blogger died from undisclosed causes and no one was willing to continue selling the jasmonate.

Attached to this post is my friend's CT scan. I used 3D doctor to view his scans in 3D. It's kind of sad knowing who's under the shirt and what that little round thing means. The lack of symmetry in the lung vascularization (AVMs in right side) is due to some unknown cause that is either congenital or an early serious infection.

Attached File  NEAT3.jpg   36.15KB   28 downloads

Edited by zawy, 14 September 2009 - 01:01 AM.


#40 Gerald W. Gaston

  • Guest
  • 529 posts
  • 58
  • Location:USA

Posted 14 September 2009 - 02:22 AM

Methyl jasmonate looks good in pubmed. The inhaler to get it to the blood is interesting. Strange how the blogger died from undisclosed causes and no one was willing to continue selling the jasmonate.


I believe there is another thread here (for First Immortal) that lists some other suppliers. And there is: http://www.methyljasmonate.com/

#41 DeadMeat

  • Guest
  • 151 posts
  • 160

Posted 14 September 2009 - 01:27 PM

Methyl jasmonate looks good in pubmed. The inhaler to get it to the blood is interesting. Strange how the blogger died from undisclosed causes and no one was willing to continue selling the jasmonate.


He died from viral pneumonia. Contributing to that getting worse, was probably the death of two of his best friends and not taking care of himself in general.

Its really a tragic story, but here are the relevant blogs in order, if you want to read them.
http://grouppekurosawa.blogspot.com/2009/04/dr-steves-not-so-excellent-medical
http://grouppekurosawa.blogspot.com/2009/05/healing-powers-of-laughter
http://grouppekurosawa.blogspot.com/2009/05/apologies
http://grouppekurosawa.blogspot.com/2009/06/more-apologies
http://grouppekurosawa.blogspot.com/2009/06/gk-web-family-updates
http://grouppekurosawa.blogspot.com/2009/06/my-health
http://grouppekurosawa.blogspot.com/2009/07/web-family-updates
http://grouppekurosawa.blogspot.com/2009/08/sad-news
http://grouppekurosawa.blogspot.com/2009/08/website-updates.html

#42 tham

  • Guest
  • 1,406 posts
  • 498
  • Location:Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Posted 14 September 2009 - 07:07 PM

In the meantime, take a daily tea of sweet or blue violet
leaves (Viola odorata). Cheap and convenient.

http://www.mountainr...bulkherb/b.html

This guy in another forum told of his friend with prostate
cancer taking a tea of blue violet and red clover daily, until
the tumor ruptured and he passed out a bloody mass.
He took a quart or so a day.

The related plants, Wild Pansy (Viola arvensis) and
Heartsease (Viola tricolor) also have anticancer action.

http://mct.aacrjourn...nt/full/1/6/365

Edited by tham, 14 September 2009 - 07:17 PM.


#43 zawy

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 291 posts
  • 46
  • Location:USA

Posted 14 September 2009 - 07:28 PM

A web site says selenite is more toxic than the other forms, so my previous comments on toxicity of "selenium" may not be accurate for sodium selenite. The web site said chronic 3,000 mcg of methylselenocysteine may be harmful (I agree that's accurate) compared with 900 mcg selenite. Methylselenocysteine is an available "natural" form that is much more effective in cancer than the common selenium form found in most pills. The cysteine part makes me wonder if it solves the uptake problem mentioned before with sodium selenite. Or if just ingesting cysteine with the selenite will increase absorption into the cancer cells. Knowing if that's possible would take someone a lot more knowledgeable than I about pharmacology and chemistry.

Sodium selenite LD50 in rats is 7 mg/kg and LC50 in fish was 10 mg/L. As a rough rule I'd want to stay below 1/100th of these even if I'm trying to "cure cancer" which would be about 5,000 mcg/day. OSHA and ACGIH TLV allow 0.2 mg/m^3 in 40 hour work weeks which is 1,700 mcg/day averaged over a week in people breathing 12 m^3 per day with 100% absorption. This is "selenium compounds". This does not lower my previous guidance for myself or friends by much, but emphasizes the importance of keeping an eye out for problems which are:

Chronic Exposure:
Chronic selenium intoxication may cause depression, nervousness, dermatitis, gastrointestinal disturbances, giddiness, garlic odor of the breath and sweat, moderate emotional instability, excess tooth cavities, loss of fingernails and hair, metallic taste in the mouth, respiratory tract irritation, fatigue, allergic eye reactions, and severe skin lesions. Selenium intoxication has caused blood, liver, kidney and spleen effects in laboratory animals.
Aggravation of Pre-existing Conditions:
Pepole with a history of asthma, allergies, known sensitization to selenium, a history of other chronic respiratory disease, gastrointestinal disturbances, disorders of the liver, blood or kidneys, or recurrent dermatitis would be expected to be at increased risk from exposure. Special consideration should be given to women of childbearing age since the possibility that selenium may be teratogenic might place these women in a high risk group.

"In laboratory animals, this compound has caused both birth defects and damage to the reproductive system"
"EPA / IRIS classification: Group D1 - Not classifiable as a human carcinogen"

Edited by zawy, 14 September 2009 - 07:35 PM.


#44 zawy

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 291 posts
  • 46
  • Location:USA

Posted 15 September 2009 - 01:31 PM

More amazing selenium research:

MSC = methylselenocysteine

2009: These results show, for the first time, the antiangiogenic effects of MSC results in
tumor growth inhibition vascular maturation in vivo, and enhanced anticancer drug delivery that are associated with the observed therapeutic synergy in vivo. ... Selenium has also been shown to exhibit antiangiogenic properties in vitro and in vivo (8, 9).Studies carried out in human umbilical vein endothelial cells have shown induction of cell death through apoptosis and reduction in matrix metalloproteinase activity (8).Selenium intake, in the form of selenized garlic or MSC has also been shown to result in reduction of vascular endothelial growth factor levels in mammary carcinomas (9). However, the effects of selenium on tumor vascular maturation and blood flow have not been previously investigated...s.c. FaDu human tumor xenografts implanted in nude mice, changes in microvessel density (MVD), pericyte coverage [vascular maturation index (VMI)], vascular perfusion, permeability, and tumor growth were evaluated following MSC treatment (0.2 mg/d × 14 days [orally in saline solution beginning 4 days after tumor implantation.]). [ human-equivalent dose: 0.2mg*(70,000 g men/20 g mice)^0.75 = 91,000 mcg/day ... should notice some minor negative effects in some people] ... a recent phase I study conducted at Roswell Park Cancer Institute has shown that selenium is well tolerated at relatively high doses (7,200 ug) over long periods in humans without serious adverse effects (24, 25) [24 and 25 quotes are below]. [ but these trials are using selenomethionine which is the least effective form in vitro but the most common form sold. Selenomethionine is supposedly the main component of yeast, although one source disagrees on that.]
http://clincancerres...14/12/3926.long

24 (2007): [ The following is great news because it shows my minimum target of 5 uM is easily reachable, and that blood concentration is fairly linear with dose. A previous reference in this thread indicates that the different forms of selenium have similar absorption and retention. ] Dose-levels > or = 5 (4,800 mcg/dose loading maintenance) resulted in day 8 Selenomethionine concentrations >15 uM while dose-level 7 (7,200 mcg/dose loading and maintenance) resulted in day 8 Selenomethionine concentrations > 20 uM. [31 patients concurent with chemo] Objective responses were seen in two patients [meaning the Se reduced the negative effects of the chemo] and nine patients had disease control for 6 months or longer.... No major protection against irinotecan toxicity was established; however, interesting clinical benefits were noted-supporting the investigation of this combination in future efficacy trials. [if they wanted to see more than 30% disease arrest from the combination, they should have used a different form of selenium]
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/17989978
http://meeting.ascop...5/18_suppl/2574

2008: MSC was 3,400 mcg/kg food/day in rats from birth to sacrifice and no negative effects were reported.
http://www.nutrition...3-7075-5-31.pdf full text

Their protocol of 14,400 mcg/day for 8 days followed by 7,200 mcg/day seems adequate and safe, if not acheiving near the max benefit. Given this, I would change my protocol to 20,000 mcg/day for a week followed by 10,000 mcg indefintely for methylselenocysteine, but half or 1/3 as much is using selenite. Studies delineating the difference between selenite and MSC in different cancers is sorely needed.

Great list of recent full-text articles about selenium and existing cancer in the references of the following paper:
http://clincancerres...7/2561.abstract

Edited by zawy, 15 September 2009 - 01:47 PM.


#45 ppp

  • Guest
  • 275 posts
  • 2
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 15 September 2009 - 01:48 PM

More amazing selenium research:

MSC = methylselenocysteine

2009: These results show, for the first time, the antiangiogenic effects of MSC results in
tumor growth inhibition vascular maturation in vivo, and enhanced anticancer drug delivery that are associated with the observed therapeutic synergy in vivo. ... Selenium has also been shown to exhibit antiangiogenic properties in vitro and in vivo (8, 9).Studies carried out in human umbilical vein endothelial cells have shown induction of cell death through apoptosis and reduction in matrix metalloproteinase activity (8).Selenium intake, in the form of selenized garlic or MSC has also been shown to result in reduction of vascular endothelial growth factor levels in mammary carcinomas (9). However, the effects of selenium on tumor vascular maturation and blood flow have not been previously investigated...s.c. FaDu human tumor xenografts implanted in nude mice, changes in microvessel density (MVD), pericyte coverage [vascular maturation index (VMI)], vascular perfusion, permeability, and tumor growth were evaluated following MSC treatment (0.2 mg/d × 14 days [orally in saline solution beginning 4 days after tumor implantation.]). [ human-equivalent dose: 0.2mg*(70,000 g men/20 g mice)^0.75 = 91,000 mcg/day ... should notice some minor negative effects in some people] ... a recent phase I study conducted at Roswell Park Cancer Institute has shown that selenium is well tolerated at relatively high doses (7,200 ug) over long periods in humans without serious adverse effects (24, 25) [24 and 25 quotes are below]. [ but these trials are using selenomethionine which is the least effective form in vitro but the most common form sold. Selenomethionine is supposedly the main component of yeast, although one source disagrees on that.]
http://clincancerres...14/12/3926.long

24 (2007): [ The following is great news because it shows my minimum target of 5 uM is easily reachable, and that blood concentration is fairly linear with dose. A previous reference in this thread indicates that the different forms of selenium have similar absorption and retention. ] Dose-levels > or = 5 (4,800 mcg/dose loading maintenance) resulted in day 8 Selenomethionine concentrations >15 uM while dose-level 7 (7,200 mcg/dose loading and maintenance) resulted in day 8 Selenomethionine concentrations > 20 uM. [31 patients concurent with chemo] Objective responses were seen in two patients [meaning the Se reduced the negative effects of the chemo] and nine patients had disease control for 6 months or longer.... No major protection against irinotecan toxicity was established; however, interesting clinical benefits were noted-supporting the investigation of this combination in future efficacy trials. [if they wanted to see more than 30% disease arrest from the combination, they should have used a different form of selenium]
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/17989978
http://meeting.ascop...5/18_suppl/2574

2008: MSC was 3,400 mcg/kg food/day in rats from birth to sacrifice and no negative effects were reported.
http://www.nutrition...3-7075-5-31.pdf full text

Their protocol of 14,400 mcg/day for 8 days followed by 7,200 mcg/day seems adequate and safe, if not acheiving near the max benefit. Given this, I would change my protocol to 20,000 mcg/day for a week followed by 10,000 mcg indefintely for methylselenocysteine, but half or 1/3 as much is using selenite. Studies delineating the difference between selenite and MSC in different cancers is sorely needed.

Great list of recent full-text articles about selenium and existing cancer in the references of the following paper:
http://clincancerres...7/2561.abstract


It would also be interesting to know whether the combination of selenite and MSC is synergistic, as it seems the two forms of selenium have different very different profiles.

#46 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 15 September 2009 - 02:07 PM

This guy in another forum told of his friend with prostate
cancer taking a tea of blue violet and red clover daily, until
the tumor ruptured and he passed out a bloody mass.
He took a quart or so a day.

tham, I don't doubt that you read that, and it's even possible that the guy passed out a bloody mass, but I do not believe that "the tumor ruptured". I have to call BS on that.

#47 zawy

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 291 posts
  • 46
  • Location:USA

Posted 15 September 2009 - 06:12 PM

Selenomethionine (SeMet) is the main ingredient in yeast and the most common form in pill. It protects cells from chemo because it has anti-oxidant effects if p53 is active. Since the "vast majority" of cancers mutate p53, it does not provide protection to them. This means it can prevent damage from chemo to "tissues such as bone marrow and gut epithelium" which get damaged from the chemo to such an extent that they limit how much chemo can be applied. So MetSe prevents chemo damage and allows higher chemo doses. This has been the largest amount of research.

In contrast, Selenite and Methylselenocysteine are pro-oxidants. Selenite specifically does not need p53 to be active. So from my limited knowledge so far, a combo of Selenomethionine and Selenite might the best plan. As I wrote before, selenite with chemo can be additive or completely negate each other, depending on the type chemo.

Then there is the methylseleninic acid (MSA) that is the best for some things. I have not gotten around to that yet. I've got 30 full text papers to read and integrate. One paper I just saw said MSA by itself had no benefit on MCF-7 breast cancer cells in vitro at 5 uM, but it did sensitize the cells to a chemo drug. Even the cell type of each group of cancers will need to be examined. Pharmaceuticals are going to finance a huge amount of selenium research, but it won't be published if selenium alone has equal or greater benefit than their chemo. Which researchers are going to want to write something that encourages patients to treat themselves? I suspect none.

The various compounds are reduced to the active forms inside the cell: methylselenol*, H2Se**, and SeMet***. These three come from:

*selenite, selenate, MSC (methylselenocysteine), MSA (methylseleninic acid), and SeCys (selenocysteine): all increase MeSeH (methylselenol) inside the cell to generate ROS

**Selenite, selenate, and SeCysb: all increase H2Se inside the cell to generate ROS

***SeMet, selenomethionine increases itself inside the cell to reduce ROS as long as p53 is not mutated.

There appears to be fantastic opportunity here with complexity that is being figured out in the research. If you see something written about "selenium", you just have to throw the data out unless you can find out what form was used.

These 3 papers were cited by one paper as describing the differences:
1)Selenomethionine induces p53 mediated cell cycle arrest and apoptosis in human colon cancer cells.
2) p53-mediated enhancement of radiosensitivity by selenophosphate synthetase 1 overexpression.
3) Selenium compounds regulate p53 by common and distinctive mechanisms.

Edited by zawy, 15 September 2009 - 06:25 PM.


#48 tham

  • Guest
  • 1,406 posts
  • 498
  • Location:Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Posted 15 September 2009 - 06:20 PM

You may want to read Dr Edgar Drake's correspondence
with me some time ago on selenite and Se-MSC.

http://www.imminst.o...mp;#entry274089

#49 zawy

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 291 posts
  • 46
  • Location:USA

Posted 15 September 2009 - 06:41 PM

Thanks tham, it seems maybe I will be able to concentrate on selenite since he seems to imply MSA has similar activity and MSC has much less effectiveness. I had emailed a gov researcher who published a recent review and he agreed 5,000 mcg/day selenite for a month would be more safe and effective on existing cancers. Long term, he was not clear, except to say 400 mcg/d by food would be a good idea. He similarly disliked that they used SeMet in the trial. But adding SeMet to my protocol does not seem harmful. Even if it does not protect against cancer, it seems to be the only form to be an anti-oxidant in non-cancer cells and therefore provide protection from chemo and selenite. As posted before, selenite might be 3 times more toxic than SeMet and other forms, and therefore not completely safe at 7,000 mcg/d like they are using in the SeMet trial).

If I discuss this for long, I'll need a signature just to define my TLAs (3-letter acronyms) so that I can remember which is which.

Edited by zawy, 15 September 2009 - 06:44 PM.


#50 tham

  • Guest
  • 1,406 posts
  • 498
  • Location:Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Posted 15 September 2009 - 07:23 PM

http://www.imminst.o...o...st&p=290708


Altenative cancer clinics in Tijuana typically give 2,000 mcg of selenite.

I don't think there should be a problem at this dosage, and
even symptoms start coming in, like metallic taste, garlicky
breath, hair loss, nausea, etc, just reduce accordingly.

Relatively mild reversible risks considering the seriousness
of the disease.

#51 zawy

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 291 posts
  • 46
  • Location:USA

Posted 15 September 2009 - 11:19 PM

Is there a reference that selenite is more toxic than the other forms? I just found it as a claim on a web site. The quote below indicates it's a natural form of selenium. The quote also shows that we should be careful not to conclude SeMet is useless based on in vitro data.

"Dietary forms of selenium, such as L-selenomethionine, require activation by b-lyase, typically in the liver, so have little in vitro activity [13]. Activated selenium species were therefore used in these studies, namely MSA, which is rapidly converted to the highly reactive methylselenol, and SDG (an active metabolite of the naturally occurring sodium selenite), which is activated further to hydrogen selenide with the generation of ROS in the process [14]."
http://annonc.oxford...eprint/17/5/773

selenodiglutathione (SDG) is the initial metabolite of selenite. It initiates p53 mediated death, but does not depend on a viable p53. http://carcin.oxford...tract/15/7/1387

So I would read "SDG" as "selenite" based on it being the initial metabolite.

NAC as an anti-oxidant deactivated SDG but not MSA, showing that SDG works by ROS generation, but MSA does not. This statement about MSA is contrary to one of the reviews. Maybe the review was citing its bulk ROS effect on the cell, not its mode of action on the cancer. In one of the 4 lymphoma cell lines, SDG worked even with NAC preventing ROS. MSA had much less effect in one of the 4 cell lines. These last two sentences showing again high specificity based on the genetics of the particular cancer cell line. Although not an ideal situation, it indicates the various forms of selenium are operating at a deeper level than something like vitamin C.

SDG/selenite can use p53 to generate ROS, but does not require it to generate ROS (is able to use capase(sp?) instead? - bad memory from another source). But it may also even cause cell death without ROS.

More good stuff from the first link above:
"Both MSA and SDG induced cytostasis and cytotoxicity in the lymphoma cell line panel studied [cytotoxic to all 4 cell lines], in a concentration and time-dependent manner. [3 days of exposure killed all lines in concentrations easily attainable by oral ingestion] .... As part of other studies we have determined that all of these lines contain p53 mutations, confirmed using a functional assay in yeast [19], which found no transcriptional p53 activity in SUD4, DHL-4 and CRL2261 cells, and reduced activity in DoHH2 cells that contain only one mutated p53 gene copy (Strauss et al., manuscript in preparation; Richard Camplejohn, personal communication). The activity of these selenium compounds is therefore not dependent on functional p53 activity, confirming previous reports that although SDG induces functional p53, this is in response to DNA damage and is not required for the induction of apoptosis [20]. MSA generated
little or no increase in ROS in any cell line. The potential
importance of ROS in the cytotoxic activity of MSA and SDG
was investigated using NAC, which increases intracellular
cysteine, resulting in increased glutathione (GSH)
concentration [21]. NAC had no effect on the activity of MSA
or SDG in DoHH2 cells, in which these compounds alone
induced little or no change in ROS. In DHL-4 cells, in which
SDG increased ROS, NAC significantly reduced SDG
cytotoxicity, while in SUD4 cells that had shown the biggest
increase in ROS in response to SDG, the addition of NAC
almost abolished cytotoxic activity. NAC had no effect on the
activity of MSA in any cell line studied."

Edited by zawy, 15 September 2009 - 11:24 PM.


#52 ppp

  • Guest
  • 275 posts
  • 2
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 16 September 2009 - 04:40 PM

Is there a reference that selenite is more toxic than the other forms? I just found it as a claim on a web site. The quote below indicates it's a natural form of selenium. The quote also shows that we should be careful not to conclude SeMet is useless based on in vitro data.

"Dietary forms of selenium, such as L-selenomethionine, require activation by b-lyase, typically in the liver, so have little in vitro activity [13]. Activated selenium species were therefore used in these studies, namely MSA, which is rapidly converted to the highly reactive methylselenol, and SDG (an active metabolite of the naturally occurring sodium selenite), which is activated further to hydrogen selenide with the generation of ROS in the process [14]."
http://annonc.oxford...eprint/17/5/773

selenodiglutathione (SDG) is the initial metabolite of selenite. It initiates p53 mediated death, but does not depend on a viable p53. http://carcin.oxford...tract/15/7/1387

So I would read "SDG" as "selenite" based on it being the initial metabolite.

NAC as an anti-oxidant deactivated SDG but not MSA, showing that SDG works by ROS generation, but MSA does not. This statement about MSA is contrary to one of the reviews. Maybe the review was citing its bulk ROS effect on the cell, not its mode of action on the cancer. In one of the 4 lymphoma cell lines, SDG worked even with NAC preventing ROS. MSA had much less effect in one of the 4 cell lines. These last two sentences showing again high specificity based on the genetics of the particular cancer cell line. Although not an ideal situation, it indicates the various forms of selenium are operating at a deeper level than something like vitamin C.

SDG/selenite can use p53 to generate ROS, but does not require it to generate ROS (is able to use capase(sp?) instead? - bad memory from another source). But it may also even cause cell death without ROS.

More good stuff from the first link above:
"Both MSA and SDG induced cytostasis and cytotoxicity in the lymphoma cell line panel studied [cytotoxic to all 4 cell lines], in a concentration and time-dependent manner. [3 days of exposure killed all lines in concentrations easily attainable by oral ingestion] .... As part of other studies we have determined that all of these lines contain p53 mutations, confirmed using a functional assay in yeast [19], which found no transcriptional p53 activity in SUD4, DHL-4 and CRL2261 cells, and reduced activity in DoHH2 cells that contain only one mutated p53 gene copy (Strauss et al., manuscript in preparation; Richard Camplejohn, personal communication). The activity of these selenium compounds is therefore not dependent on functional p53 activity, confirming previous reports that although SDG induces functional p53, this is in response to DNA damage and is not required for the induction of apoptosis [20]. MSA generated
little or no increase in ROS in any cell line. The potential
importance of ROS in the cytotoxic activity of MSA and SDG
was investigated using NAC, which increases intracellular
cysteine, resulting in increased glutathione (GSH)
concentration [21]. NAC had no effect on the activity of MSA
or SDG in DoHH2 cells, in which these compounds alone
induced little or no change in ROS. In DHL-4 cells, in which
SDG increased ROS, NAC significantly reduced SDG
cytotoxicity, while in SUD4 cells that had shown the biggest
increase in ROS in response to SDG, the addition of NAC
almost abolished cytotoxic activity. NAC had no effect on the
activity of MSA in any cell line studied."


It's still not especially clear that selenite works in all tumour cells types that are null-p53 or mutated-p53. My interest is in osteosarcoma, but I can find no papers that specifically look at selenite for this type of cancer (which is frequently mutated or null p53). I can find a paper that refers to Se02, but I don't know what form of selenium that corresponds to (or what the metabolic pathway to it is).

#53 zawy

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 291 posts
  • 46
  • Location:USA

Posted 16 September 2009 - 09:43 PM

Yes, selenite did not seem to work at all in at least H611 type lung cancer. But in most cancers tested in the test tube, it seems to work twice as good at half the dose compared to things like resveratrol. But the big difference is that selenite actually arrives to the cancer cells in humans at test tube concentrations whereas curcumin and resveratrol do not. This should be stunning to anyone who thought resveratrol and I.V. vitamin C were the best hope for cancer. For cancer cell types where selenite and other forms do not work, they may still arrest the spread. If that one paper was right in implying the only deciding factor in selenite's usefulness was if it can get inside the cell, then someone may discover a way to effect better intracell-level delivery. Certainly, an osteo cancer could be a lot different from the others, but I do not see the harm of trying high doses selenite with MSC in the hope the SeMet reduces the negatives of 5,000 mcg of selenite. My friend has been taking 5,000 mcg selenite with 2,000 mcg MSC and 500 mcg from brazil nuts for about 10 days. In a week he gets another CT scan and he has given me permission to post things here. Since his blood levels of Selenite are clearly higher than what some studies use to kill 50% in 1 to 3 days. So 16 days of it should show a difference on the CT scan, even if the dead cells have not had time to clear out. I am assuming test tube stuff is comparable to blood concentrations, but I don't know. Someone familiar with chemo uM in vitro compared to in vivo and how long it takes to reduce tumor size would know. I think a two week course of chemo is common.

Edited by zawy, 16 September 2009 - 09:43 PM.


#54 ppp

  • Guest
  • 275 posts
  • 2
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 17 September 2009 - 06:10 AM

Yes, selenite did not seem to work at all in at least H611 type lung cancer. But in most cancers tested in the test tube, it seems to work twice as good at half the dose compared to things like resveratrol. But the big difference is that selenite actually arrives to the cancer cells in humans at test tube concentrations whereas curcumin and resveratrol do not. This should be stunning to anyone who thought resveratrol and I.V. vitamin C were the best hope for cancer. For cancer cell types where selenite and other forms do not work, they may still arrest the spread. If that one paper was right in implying the only deciding factor in selenite's usefulness was if it can get inside the cell, then someone may discover a way to effect better intracell-level delivery. Certainly, an osteo cancer could be a lot different from the others, but I do not see the harm of trying high doses selenite with MSC in the hope the SeMet reduces the negatives of 5,000 mcg of selenite. My friend has been taking 5,000 mcg selenite with 2,000 mcg MSC and 500 mcg from brazil nuts for about 10 days. In a week he gets another CT scan and he has given me permission to post things here. Since his blood levels of Selenite are clearly higher than what some studies use to kill 50% in 1 to 3 days. So 16 days of it should show a difference on the CT scan, even if the dead cells have not had time to clear out. I am assuming test tube stuff is comparable to blood concentrations, but I don't know. Someone familiar with chemo uM in vitro compared to in vivo and how long it takes to reduce tumor size would know. I think a two week course of chemo is common.


Please do post those results when your friend gets them.

#55 Guest_aidanpryde_*

  • Lurker
  • 0

Posted 17 September 2009 - 01:30 PM

I am unfortunately short of time right now, but what also may be interesting is the drug mebendazole. It is an old drug usually used to get rid of worm infections, it works selective in nematode cells by disrupting the tubulin, is even in high dosage not toxic to normal mamalian cells. It seems to be toxic to several cancer cell lines, probably because the cell cycle checkpoint is not functional and perhaps the metabolism and clearance of mebendazole is not fully working. In vitro it was even effective against melanoma and it was shown to work in vivo (mice with human cancer), a lot of plant compounds may do wonders in cell culture but do not work in vivo. Mebendazole was used for a whole while in other conditions, so the risks using it are low through the specificity and there is lot of data how to improve oral availability (dissolve in lipids, use phospholipids etc.). Instead of using for example resveratrol I would try rather mebendazole, together with an other therapy it could be even more effective. There are lot of informations also in this forum, just search for it.

Look at this one:

The anthelmintic drug mebendazole induces mitotic arrest and apoptosis by depolymerizing tubulin in non-small cell lung cancer cells.Sasaki J, Ramesh R, Chada S, Gomyo Y, Roth JA, Mukhopadhyay T.
Section of Thoracic Molecular Oncology, Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas 77030, USA.

Microtubules have a critical role in cell division, and consequently various microtubule inhibitors have been developed as anticancer drugs. In this study, we assess mebendazole (MZ), a microtubule-disrupting anthelmintic that exhibits a potent antitumor property both in vitro and in vivo. Treatment of lung cancer cell lines with MZ caused mitotic arrest, followed by apoptotic cell death with the feature of caspase activation and cytochrome c release. MZ induces abnormal spindle formation in mitotic cancer cells and enhances the depolymerization of tubulin, but the efficacy of depolymerization by MZ is lower than that by nocodazole. Oral administration of MZ in mice elicited a strong antitumor effect in a s.c. model and reduced lung colonies in experimentally induced lung metastasis without any toxicity when compared with paclitaxel-treated mice. We speculate that tumor cells may be defective in one mitotic checkpoint function and sensitive to the spindle inhibitor MZ. Abnormal spindle formation may be the key factor determining whether a cell undergoes apoptosis, whereas strong microtubule inhibitors elicit toxicity even in normal cells.

PMID: 12479701 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


full version:
http://mct.aacrjourn.../1/13/1201.long

One interesting image (A) from this paper is the following showing the size of tumors of treated and not treated, control animals. Also the number of apoptotic cells is higher as can be seen in the pictures down below, looks interesting.
Posted Image

Edited by aidanpryde, 17 September 2009 - 01:31 PM.


#56 ppp

  • Guest
  • 275 posts
  • 2
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 17 September 2009 - 03:06 PM

I am unfortunately short of time right now, but what also may be interesting is the drug mebendazole. It is an old drug usually used to get rid of worm infections, it works selective in nematode cells by disrupting the tubulin, is even in high dosage not toxic to normal mamalian cells. It seems to be toxic to several cancer cell lines, probably because the cell cycle checkpoint is not functional and perhaps the metabolism and clearance of mebendazole is not fully working. In vitro it was even effective against melanoma and it was shown to work in vivo (mice with human cancer), a lot of plant compounds may do wonders in cell culture but do not work in vivo. Mebendazole was used for a whole while in other conditions, so the risks using it are low through the specificity and there is lot of data how to improve oral availability (dissolve in lipids, use phospholipids etc.). Instead of using for example resveratrol I would try rather mebendazole, together with an other therapy it could be even more effective. There are lot of informations also in this forum, just search for it.


I've always thought this an interesting avenue to explore. However, maximising availability with cimetidine is difficult for people in countries where it's not an OTC drug. And in the UK, for example, mebendazole itself is only available in lower doses. So getting the sufficient materials isn't so straightforward.

Edited by ppp, 17 September 2009 - 03:07 PM.


#57 tham

  • Guest
  • 1,406 posts
  • 498
  • Location:Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Posted 17 September 2009 - 07:22 PM

But why should you worry about H611, a SCLC line,
when your friend has NSCLC ?

Selenite works against A549, an adenocarcinoma (NSCLC) line,
and also has antioxidant action against hydrogen peroxide.

Their anticancer action against A549 appears to be due to
oxidation of intracellular sulfhydryl groups.

http://www.ncbi.nlm....l=pubmed_docsum

http://www.ncbi.nlm....l=pubmed_docsum

Edited by tham, 17 September 2009 - 07:34 PM.


#58 tham

  • Guest
  • 1,406 posts
  • 498
  • Location:Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Posted 17 September 2009 - 07:32 PM

Selenium at low levels, 50 nmol/L to 0.25 µmol/L, is actually
a growth factor.

http://www.ncbi.nlm....l=pubmed_docsum


" Selenium can either stimulate or inhibit cell growth, depending on
the concentration and chemical form of selenium. At concentrations
higher than nutritional requirements, selenium has anticancer effects.
These may be mediated through changes in the proliferation of
certain cells (such as promotion of immune cells), cell apoptosis
and/or a toxic effect on cancer cells. In most cases, ~3–5 µmol/L
selenite is the lowest concentration to inhibit cell growth. "

http://jn.nutrition..../full/132/4/674

#59 zawy

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 291 posts
  • 46
  • Location:USA

Posted 17 September 2009 - 11:02 PM

But why should you worry about H611, a SCLC line,
when your friend has NSCLC ?

I thought the paper I was reading about it and H157 said they were both NSCLC. Thank for the correction.

Sometime maybe I'll make a table of all the data on the various cancers with the various forms of selenium.

"As the result, tumor cells become surrounded by a coat which masks specific tumor antigens thus allowing cancer cells to escape immune recognition and elimination by natural killer (NK) cells. Selenite by virtue of oxidizing cell membrane thiols, can prevent the formation of the coat and consequently makes cancer cells vulnerable to the immune surveillance and destruction. In addition, selenite may directly activate NK cells, as well as inhibit angiogenesis without undesirable decrease in the oxidative potential of cellular environment. It is, therefore, postulated that sodium selenite, in view of its relative low toxicity, might become a drug of choice for many types of cancer including leukemia." 2005

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/15694701

Brain cancer:
"Our study revealed that 1 to 10 µmol/L selenite was preferentially toxic to various glioma cells over human normal astrocytes. Zhang et al. (42) previously reported that Wistar rats with brain gliomas given selenite-containing drinking water showed preferential selenite accumulation in tumor tissue versus normal brain. They also showed that dietary selenium decreased tumor development in rat transplanted with glioma (43)."

http://cancerres.aac...rint/67/13/6314 (2007 Full text)

"Viability and proliferative capacity of A20 cells were altered by increasing concentrations of Se
Sodium selenite at 0–50 μM did not affect cell viability after 24 h exposure (Fig. 1A).
However, at 72 h exposure, there was a significant decrease in cell viability to approximately
40% and 18% of control levels following exposure to 25 and 50 μM Se, respectively. At 96 h,
the cell viability significantly decreased at 5, 25 and 50 μM Se by 46%, 74% and 94%,
respectively. Exposure of A20 cells to >5 μM resulted in significantly greater viability at 24 h
than at 96 h. Only at Se concentrations of 25 and 50 μM was viability significantly greater at 24
h than at 72 h. Following 72 h treatment with 5 and 25 μM Se, viability was significantly higher
than at 96 h."

http://toxsci.oxford...nt/kfh072v1.pdf

"In another case, an elderly man who was concerned that he might have prostate cancer ingested 10 g of sodium selenite. He developed significant abdominal pain, vomiting and diarrhea, hypotension, and ventricular tachycardia. Blood tests showed acidosis, hypokalaemia and an excessive selenium concentration. Despite symptomatic therapy, he suffered a cardiac arrest and died. "

I had to do a "hack" on google to get the above quote because they are "being evil" against their stated policy, doing what they said they would never do: paid results show up in the regular listings. Often you'll see research articles come up after a search, but you can't see the words you searched unless you pay to see the article.

Edited by zawy, 17 September 2009 - 11:47 PM.


sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this MEDICINES advertising spot to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#60 Anthony_Loera

  • Life Member
  • 3,168 posts
  • 745
  • Location:Miami Florida

Posted 18 September 2009 - 12:27 PM

Hello Anthony,

I was just curious, how has that research data affected your perspective regarding Curcumin and the development of a supplement for RevGenetics?


Best,

M.


I haven't been provided a link, or study so I am continuing with this product.

Specially due to news here, even though I don't think there is info on lung cancer:
http://www.imminst.o...rgy-t32753.html

cheers
A

Edited by Anthony_Loera, 18 September 2009 - 12:29 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users