Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

internalization of C60 into cancer cells with accumulation in the nucleus

c60 cancer nucleus green light

  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

#1 zorba990

  • Registered User
  • 938 posts
  • 131

Posted 02 November 2012 - 10:55 PM


http://www.kanziusca...e_157.pdf (not C60oo)

Now given that green light LEDs can be used as an anti-cancer regimen:
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/22122922 (with an sensitizing agent)
(

The percentage of apoptotic cells increased gradually to 84% at 6h after 20μM ICG-PDT and the percentage of necrotic cells dramatically increased to 65% at 3h after 200μM ICG-PDT.)



And C60 absorbs green light,

Indocyanine

LED + C60 = cancer treatment?



Seems like it would be easy to try this out on skin cancer, with a topical treatment and a

785nm LED light.





Edited by zorba990, 02 November 2012 - 11:23 PM.

  • 0

#2 somecallmetim

  • Registered User
  • 57 posts
  • 19
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 03 November 2012 - 01:35 AM

In the first study you cited, they used water-soluble, non-ionic derivatized-fullerenes and were injected, so their pathways and accumulation sites may differ from the c60-oo that people here are ingesting. I was having trouble with the link provided, so I'll post another link here:

http://www.kanziusca...cs/file_157.pdf


In the second citation, they used Indocyanine green, which is a dye that is bluish-green in color, but absorbs radiation in the 700-800 nm range, which is in the infra-red spectrum - not green. The spectrum range for green is ~ 510 to 570 nm.
I just so happen to have a spot on my arm that may possibly be skin cancer, so if anyone wants to send me an array of 50 mw, 785 nm LEDs similar to the study, I'll supply the c60-oo and we'll see what happens.
  • 0

sponsored ad

  • Advert

#3 niner

  • Member, Moderator
  • 14,538 posts
  • 3,459
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 03 November 2012 - 12:43 PM

I just so happen to have a spot on my arm that may possibly be skin cancer, so if anyone wants to send me an array of 50 mw, 785 nm LEDs similar to the study, I'll supply the c60-oo and we'll see what happens.


Frankly, tim, the odds of this working are approximately zero. Please see a dermatologist.
  • 1

#4 somecallmetim

  • Registered User
  • 57 posts
  • 19
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 04 November 2012 - 04:56 AM

Frankly, niner, I don't recall asking for advice. If I want to apply c60-oo on my arm and shine a light on it, then please respect my right to do so.

And I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss this line of thought; I think what Zorba posted is worth exploring. I was going to create a new thread, but I guess I'll just post it here. I think it was actually Zorba who mentioned the similarity of c60 and Edgar Cayce's "Carbon Ash" in a post a few months ago, but no one responded to it at the time. So I would like to revisit it now. (Warning: this post may contain ideas that do not conform to left-brain way of thinking, and may cause some to feel uncomfortable. Proceed at your own risk.)

In 1928, clients went to Edgar Cayce, a psychic, asking how to treat illnesses such as cancer. In quite a few of the readings he described the precise method on how to create c60, and nearly seventy years later became known as the Kratschmer-Huffman method. Cayce called the c60 by the names "Carbon Ash" or "Activated Ash." He advised the clients to ingest the ash and wait about 30 minutes, then expose their skin to certain wavelengths of light for a short duration. This would supposedly excite the c60 to release singlet oxygen, which in turn would destroy diseased cells. A link to a website explaining this in greater detail can be found here.

Even if one thinks that all psychics are fake, you still have to give the guy credit for coming up with c60 seventy years before modern science did. And so, if he came up with c60, then perhaps he was also on to something in regards to the photodynamic part of the protocol. Food for thought.
  • 0

#5 zorba990

  • Registered User
  • 938 posts
  • 131

Posted 04 November 2012 - 05:44 AM

Frankly, niner, I don't recall asking for advice. If I want to apply c60-oo on my arm and shine a light on it, then please respect my right to do so.

And I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss this line of thought; I think what Zorba posted is worth exploring. I was going to create a new thread, but I guess I'll just post it here. I think it was actually Zorba who mentioned the similarity of c60 and Edgar Cayce's "Carbon Ash" in a post a few months ago, but no one responded to it at the time. So I would like to revisit it now. (Warning: this post may contain ideas that do not conform to left-brain way of thinking, and may cause some to feel uncomfortable. Proceed at your own risk.)

In 1928, clients went to Edgar Cayce, a psychic, asking how to treat illnesses such as cancer. In quite a few of the readings he described the precise method on how to create c60, and nearly seventy years later became known as the Kratschmer-Huffman method. Cayce called the c60 by the names "Carbon Ash" or "Activated Ash." He advised the clients to ingest the ash and wait about 30 minutes, then expose their skin to certain wavelengths of light for a short duration. This would supposedly excite the c60 to release singlet oxygen, which in turn would destroy diseased cells. A link to a website explaining this in greater detail can be found here.

Even if one thinks that all psychics are fake, you still have to give the guy credit for coming up with c60 seventy years before modern science did. And so, if he came up with c60, then perhaps he was also on to something in regards to the photodynamic part of the protocol. Food for thought.


Yes, it was me who mentioned that. I think it is worth exploring. You might be able to get something close here:
http://www.theledman.com

I own a 904 nm infrared laser so I might try some experiments when I make my C60. But honestly I'm not sure what the right frequencies would be.

Edited by zorba990, 04 November 2012 - 05:44 AM.

  • 0

#6 somecallmetim

  • Registered User
  • 57 posts
  • 19
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 06 November 2012 - 06:39 AM

There are numerous studies showing that different wavelengths have tissue healing effects, but for our purposes I think we want to focus on what Edgar Cayce described, which is that green light is the most healing wavelength. I believe, and so do the authors of the article I cited above, that the reason Cayce insisted on using either a mercury vapor lamp or an infrared lamp is because of their strong intensity - not particularly for their wavelength. Those were the few sources of light during the 20's & 30's that could put out enough light intensity, and by placing the green glass between the lamp and the client/patient, this would allow only the green wavelength to filter through and come in contact with the person. But now we have lasers and LEDs to experiment with.

If Cayce is correct about green being the most healing of the wavelengths, and that green also stimulates c60 to release singlet oxygen, then using them in conjunction with one another should be a pretty powerful combo. And if that isn't enough, using infrared along with the green supposedly ups the healing effect. I sent an email yesterday to one of the authors of the article asking him if he knows which infrared wavelength is the most effective - I haven't received a response yet.

Here is a study showing that green light is good at healing wounds, and it just so happens that the green LEDs they used in the study is the exact wavelength that Cayce recommended - 518 nm.

If you haven't yet read the article about Edgar Cayce, c60, and light therapy, then here it is again. There are 11 pages in total and I think it's a fascinating read.
  • 0

#7 niner

  • Member, Moderator
  • 14,538 posts
  • 3,459
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 06 November 2012 - 01:37 PM

Frankly, niner, I don't recall asking for advice. If I want to apply c60-oo on my arm and shine a light on it, then please respect my right to do so.


If you die of a treatable melanoma (or even SCC) because you wanted to experiment, it's on you. You have every right to do that. If someone reading this forum sees your post, decides to do the same thing, and they die, it's on me. This is an open forum that everyone who adheres to the posting guidelines can comment on, so I hope you will also respect our right to do so.

I'll check out the Edgar Cayce c60 stuff. It sounds interesting.
  • 0

#8 Turnbuckle

  • Registered User
  • 1,533 posts
  • 309
  • Location:USA

Posted 06 November 2012 - 03:10 PM

He advised the clients to ingest the ash and wait about 30 minutes, then expose their skin to certain wavelengths of light for a short duration. This would supposedly excite the c60 to release singlet oxygen, which in turn would destroy diseased cells. A link to a website explaining this in greater detail can be found here.



These quotes appear nowhere else and the links give a 404 error. Not a good sign. That said, people are selling this stuff--

http://www.baar.com/ash.htm
  • 0

#9 Anthony_Loera

  • Lifetime Member
  • 2,950 posts
  • 510
  • Location:Miami Florida

Posted 06 November 2012 - 03:19 PM


He advised the clients to ingest the ash and wait about 30 minutes, then expose their skin to certain wavelengths of light for a short duration. This would supposedly excite the c60 to release singlet oxygen, which in turn would destroy diseased cells. A link to a website explaining this in greater detail can be found here.



These quotes appear nowhere else and the links give a 404 error. Not a good sign. That said, people are selling this stuff--

http://www.baar.com/ash.htm


I actually did find it a while back in a Cyce book, but it was a long time ago, and i thought it was wacky at the time because he talked about ash.

Now i find it interesting... There is no proof that it will work (until maybe a study verifies it?) , but find it interesting nonetheless.

A


  • 0

#10 Junk Master

  • Registered User
  • 425 posts
  • 53
  • Location:United States

Posted 06 November 2012 - 04:20 PM

The c60/00 plus LED is fascinating stuff, but I'm with Niner. I would not take any chances with a treatable melanoma anymore then I'd take up Russian Roulette as a hobby.
  • 0

#11 somecallmetim

  • Registered User
  • 57 posts
  • 19
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 06 November 2012 - 07:21 PM

If someone reading this forum sees your post, decides to do the same thing, and they die, it's on me.


Section03 Content
© You understand that by using the Site, you may be exposed to Content that you may deem offensive, indecent or objectionable.
(d) ImmInst does not control the Content contributed by users and, consequently, provides no guarantee as to the correctness, integrity or fitness of such Content.
(h) ImmInst cannot be held responsible for any Content that has been contributed through its open platform.


Section07 Content related to health
(a) Any and all advice and/or opinion provided is strictly personal and never endorsed by ImmInst, nor should it be construed to be the official policy of ImmInst to provide health advice.
(b) You must seek professional medical advice prior to embarking on any course or treatment associated with any Content on the Site.
(d) All Information on the ImmInst Forums, including those associated with health, sciences fora are provided as an area for the open exchange of anecdotal experience and information, not as a professional source of advice.
  • 0

#12 somecallmetim

  • Registered User
  • 57 posts
  • 19
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:07 PM

Turnbuckle,


Which links are coming back as 404 errors?
  • 0

#13 Turnbuckle

  • Registered User
  • 1,533 posts
  • 309
  • Location:USA

Posted 06 November 2012 - 09:51 PM

Turnbuckle,


Which links are coming back as 404 errors?



All of the "Text of Reading" links.
  • 0

#14 maxwatt

  • Member, Moderator
  • 4,558 posts
  • 1,414
  • Location:New York

Posted 06 November 2012 - 11:27 PM

Basal cell skin cancers grow and spread slowly, squamous cell are a little more serious, they've penetrated more layers. Melanoma is quickly lethal, so much so Doctors may sometimes try to cut it out on the spot when they find it, right in their office. Happened to a friend of mine but it had already spread.. That is the treatment, removal. If melanoma, go for it. If Basal cell you may have time to fart around with untried but intriguing remedies.
  • 0

#15 niner

  • Member, Moderator
  • 14,538 posts
  • 3,459
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 06 November 2012 - 11:50 PM

If someone reading this forum sees your post, decides to do the same thing, and they die, it's on me.


Section03 Content
...

Section07 Content related to health
...


Yes, Longecity covers itself pretty well with respect to liability, but I was really thinking about feeling morally culpable if I didn't say something.
  • 0

#16 somecallmetim

  • Registered User
  • 57 posts
  • 19
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 06 November 2012 - 11:51 PM

Thanks for everyone's concern. Just to set the record straight, I've had "it" on my arm for over two years. I don't know what "it" is, but I'm not overly worried about it at this time. If it worsens, I will seek appropriate medical attention.
  • 0

#17 1kgcoffee

  • Member
  • 735 posts
  • 249

Posted 07 November 2012 - 12:13 AM

somecallmetim,
You have the right, but you are being unbelievably dumb. Is your life worth that of lab rat?

He advised the clients to ingest the ash and wait about 30 minutes, then expose their skin to certain wavelengths of light for a short duration. This would supposedly excite the c60 to release singlet oxygen, which in turn would destroy diseased cells. A link to a website explaining this in greater detail can be found here.


How exactly does c60 'release singlet oxygen', and how exactly does singlet oxygen induce apoptosis selectively in cancer cells. That's a huge leap. Your use of the word supposedly tells me that you don't know what the hell you're talking about.

Oh - and don't go around posting about psychics on a forum dedicated to science.

Edited by 1kgcoffee, 07 November 2012 - 12:14 AM.

  • -1

#18 niner

  • Member, Moderator
  • 14,538 posts
  • 3,459
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 07 November 2012 - 12:19 AM

By the way, the Edgar Cayce link was pretty interesting. He really did come pretty close to a modern C60 generator, and I can't see any way he could have figured it out on his own- Maybe it was a vision of the future, who knows. There was one bug, that he admitted air into the chamber instead of using an inert gas. I'd have to guess that would have suppressed the yield dramatically, but there probably was at least a little c60 in the "ash". I can't imagine it would have been very bioavailable; most of it would have run straight through the GI tract. I'm guessing that there wasn't a really impressive list of cures, or it seems like this stuff would have taken off, considering the lack of anything better in the 19th and early 20th centuries. One explanation is that Cayce might have had a huge list of readings, and these details were cherry-picked after the fact. Just a thought. Kind of like you can "prove" anything you want with the Bible, depending on what you quote out of context, and which translation you're using. But I don't know. As presented, it sure sounds like he had a pretty accurate vision, however, I'd want to see some evidence that it was providing cures. If I wanted to experiment with some sort of C60 chemotherapy, I'd do it in animals or cell culture, not on myself.
  • 0

#19 Anthony_Loera

  • Lifetime Member
  • 2,950 posts
  • 510
  • Location:Miami Florida

Posted 07 November 2012 - 12:48 AM

How exactly does c60 'release singlet oxygen'.


When i interviewed Professor Moussa, and asked him a out C60 use on skin, he did provide a caution about this use because of light...

Click on the link below to see the video again:
http://c60.net/full-...r-fathi-moussa/

Having said that... I really don't know how C60 could target (or be attracted to) cancer cells or if the light could affect C60 inside cells.

Maybe someone can make sense of this more than I, but this study appears relevant:
(http://cohesion.rice...plibrary/88.pdf)

A

Edited by Anthony_Loera, 07 November 2012 - 02:51 AM.

  • 0

#20 somecallmetim

  • Registered User
  • 57 posts
  • 19
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 07 November 2012 - 04:14 AM

How exactly does c60 'release singlet oxygen', and how exactly does singlet oxygen induce apoptosis selectively in cancer cells. That's a huge leap. Your use of the word supposedly tells me that you don't know what the hell you're talking about.


No, the use of the word 'supposedly' should have told you that I was summarizing what the website claimed, and that I did not necessarily know whether said claims were correct or not.

Oh - and don't go around posting about psychics on a forum dedicated to science.


You obviously didn't read the warning. Others have expressed an interest in the topic, so it doesn't look like I'm going to grant your request. But that was so sweet of you to defend science like that. If science could have been here to have witnessed that, I'm sure science would have been impressed.

I think it's time for someone to switch to Sanka.
  • 0

#21 somecallmetim

  • Registered User
  • 57 posts
  • 19
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 07 November 2012 - 05:21 AM

I really don't know how C60 could target (or be attracted to) cancer cells or if the light could affect C60 inside cells.


The authors of the Cayce article mentioned a few different companies that were looking into this at the time the article was written, which I'm guessing was early 2000's. They mention C Sixty, Inc., which had Dr. Smalley on the Board of Directors at the time. They also mention a company named BioPhotoFullerenes, Inc., and I could only find one relevant page from 2003 about the company here. Here is a quote:
"BioPhotoFullerenes will be developing cancer therapy applications based on the principle of photodynamic therapy, but utilizing the Fullerene molecule. Holding many patents and with a strong milestone-driven development plan, the team expressed its confidence in the prospects for the company. Initial applications will focus on skin-deep tumor therapy and other skin disease applications, according to Chen. Chiang also announced that home kit versions of skin therapy using the company's technology may be released as early as the end of this year, pending the successful search for a marketing partner."

When I get some time, I'll try to locate these patents. Or if anyone else wants to track them down, that would be great.

And lastly, there was Project 2592, titled Laser Fullerene-Oxygen Therapy that was coordinated by the International Science & Technology Center out of Russia. This project looks like it was quite an undertaking, and it was completed in 2007. The page describing the project is here.
  • 0

#22 1kgcoffee

  • Member
  • 735 posts
  • 249

Posted 07 November 2012 - 04:16 PM


Oh - and don't go around posting about psychics on a forum dedicated to science.


You obviously didn't read the warning. Others have expressed an interest in the topic, so it doesn't look like I'm going to grant your request. But that was so sweet of you to defend science like that. If science could have been here to have witnessed that, I'm sure science would have been impressed.


Mysticisim and science are like water and oil. They don't mix. We have enough trouble being taken seriously by the mainstream without our members trying to combine the two. Edgar Cayce was probably describing activated charcoal, which was known about in his time. He didn't describe the structure of c60 in his readings and no one was ever cured of cancer by his methods.
  • 0

#23 zorba990

  • Registered User
  • 938 posts
  • 131

Posted 07 November 2012 - 06:12 PM



Oh - and don't go around posting about psychics on a forum dedicated to science.


You obviously didn't read the warning. Others have expressed an interest in the topic, so it doesn't look like I'm going to grant your request. But that was so sweet of you to defend science like that. If science could have been here to have witnessed that, I'm sure science would have been impressed.


Mysticisim and science are like water and oil. They don't mix. We have enough trouble being taken seriously by the mainstream without our members trying to combine the two. Edgar Cayce was probably describing activated charcoal, which was known about in his time. He didn't describe the structure of c60 in his readings and no one was ever cured of cancer by his methods.


Water and oil certainly mix under the right conditions.

What Cayce described was using an electrical method that was probably the best they had at the time to create carbon ash with any amount of fullerenes in it.

Dismissing things out of hand is not science either. Making a 'new form of carbon' (fullerenes), ingesting it, and then irradiating the body with light is certainly forward thinking for Cayce's time.

Regardless of where an idea comes from, if it's plausible to test it out in theory then why not? Tesla said he spoke with aliens. Do we dismiss all his work because of this? How about Steve Jobs' LSD trips?
Here are a few others: http://www.huffingto..._n_1710730.html
  • 2

#24 JamesNV

  • Registered User
  • 8 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Canada

Posted 12 November 2012 - 12:44 AM

Mysticisim and science are like water and oil. They don't mix. We have enough trouble being taken seriously by the mainstream without our members trying to combine the two. ...


A reasonable strategy: you should be as dry, stuffy, boring, materialistic and "academic" as possible or nobody will take you seriously. That's a very real anxiety.

Edited by JamesNV, 12 November 2012 - 12:45 AM.

  • 0

#25 1kgcoffee

  • Member
  • 735 posts
  • 249

Posted 12 November 2012 - 02:51 AM

If you think that science is 'dry, stuffy and boring' then maybe you are in the wrong place. I'm not sure what has attracted you to this website, since it is filled with so much dry science and so little of the exciting stuff like psychics, fairies, leprachauns, mermaids, etc. We need more of that for sure!

zorba990,
There is no rational basis for your hypothesis. That idea is not plausible, and unless you can come up with something besides the rambling of a so called psychic, it's not worth testing.

I am signing out permanently from this thread.
  • 0

#26 zorba990

  • Registered User
  • 938 posts
  • 131

Posted 12 November 2012 - 03:34 AM

If you think that science is 'dry, stuffy and boring' then maybe you are in the wrong place. I'm not sure what has attracted you to this website, since it is filled with so much dry science and so little of the exciting stuff like psychics, fairies, leprachauns, mermaids, etc. We need more of that for sure!

zorba990,
There is no rational basis for your hypothesis. That idea is not plausible, and unless you can come up with something besides the rambling of a so called psychic, it's not worth testing.

I am signing out permanently from this thread.


It's not science that is dry, stuffy and boring - it's limited, repeated, blinders-on science that refuses to think out of the box.
There is health enhancement beyond supplements and drugs.

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/21542456

Edited by zorba990, 12 November 2012 - 03:40 AM.

  • 1

#27 Anthony_Loera

  • Lifetime Member
  • 2,950 posts
  • 510
  • Location:Miami Florida

Posted 12 November 2012 - 03:41 AM

That is interesting Zorba, thanks for that!

A


  • 0

#28 somecallmetim

  • Registered User
  • 57 posts
  • 19
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 17 November 2012 - 05:45 AM

One of the co-authors of the Cayce article replied to my email, and he said that they use a common infrared heat lamp along with the green glass for healing therapies.
  • 0

#29 niner

  • Member, Moderator
  • 14,538 posts
  • 3,459
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 17 November 2012 - 08:46 PM

Here's the abstract that zorba linked in the post above:

Oncol Res. 2011;19(5):203-16.
Anticancer effects of fullerene [C60] included in polyethylene glycol combined with visible light irradiation through ROS generation and DNA fragmentation on fibrosarcoma cells with scarce cytotoxicity to normal fibroblasts.
Liao F, Saitoh Y, Miwa N.

Laboratory of Cell-Death Control BioTechnology, Department of Life Sciences, Faculty of Life and Environmental Sciences, Prefectural University of Hiroshima, Shobara, Hiroshima, Japan.

Fullerene [C60] included in polyethylene glycol (PEG) at a composing ratio of 1:350 w/w was examined for anticancer effects upon photodynamic therapy (PDT). Human connective tissue-derived fibrosarcoma cells HT1080 were decreased for a viability of 50% or 30%, by 3-h administration with PEG-fullerene [C60] at 50 or 100 ppm fullerene [C60] equivalent, respectively, subsequent rinsing out and irradiation with visible light (400-600 nm, 140 J/cm2: 450-fold as intense as in average outdoor), whereas the same tissue type-derived normal fibroblastic cells DUMS16 retained a viability of 93% or 85% under the same conditions. Anticancer effects were dependent on PEG-fullerene [C60] concentrations and irradiation doses, and scarcely exerted by PEG-fullerene [C60] alone, irradiation alone, or by fullerene [C60]-free PEG combined with irradiation, suggesting that the active principle may be fullerene [C60] as small as 0.0028 wt% versus the whole compound. Irradiation with PEG-fullerene [C60] occurred in intracellular DNA fragmentation according to TUNEL assay, and produced reactive oxygen species (ROS) such as hydroperoxides and peroxyl radicals or superoxide anion radicals in HT1080 cells as demonstrated by CDCFH-DA assay or nitroblue tetrazolium assay, respectively. Thus, PEG-fullerene [C60] is expected to be applied to anticancer PDT with scarce side effects on normal cells.

PMID: 21542456


I just wanted to point out the dosage involved here, both for the C60 and for the light. One ppm is the same as one mg/kg; the only people here that have ever dosed at that level are Carbon and Anthony. The doses used in this experiment are 50 and 100 times as high as that, so a 70kg person would need to drink 4.375 or 8.750 liters of c60-oo to obtain that dose. The authors helpfully pointed out that the photon flux was 450 time the average outdoor level, so I guess you'd then need to stand under a really gigantic magnifying glass...

If you use the c60 topically, you can put a lot higher concentration on your skin, but things like olive oil really don't absorb all that well through skin, so I think there would still be a problem there. They were able to get a 50 to 70% kill rate for the particular sarcoma cells they looked at in vitro, but that isn't very high if you're considering this as a therapy.
  • 0

sponsored ad

  • Advert

#30 somecallmetim

  • Registered User
  • 57 posts
  • 19
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 18 November 2012 - 03:35 AM

Yeah, when I read the abstract and saw the 140 J/cm2, I first thought that it must be a misprint, but then I saw the 450-fold blurb. That's a hell of a lot of light! Must be using a pulsed nano or femto laser. Any more than a second of exposure to this amount of light, and that tissue would be burnt to a crisp. I don't know why they chose that intensity, but just because they got the results they did from that amount doesn't necessarily mean a lesser amount wouldn't offer any benefit. I'd sure like to find the full text to this study, but I've looked high n' low and nothing so far.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users