Cancer Cured in Mice
#61
Posted 12 February 2009 - 03:23 AM
Lastly, I am wondering with all of this talk about other promising cures or potential cures for cancer, are we forgetting about the obvious potential cancer treatment right under our noses? Resveratrol!!!!! I keep hearing in this forum how people have given themselves and or friends or relatives doses of Resveratrol for different cancers that have seemed to work in a positive way. Why can we not do clinical trials on humans with Resveratrol and even if the government shuts it down, I am sure that there are enough of us in this forum that know someone who may have a cancer that wouldn't mind experimenting with it. In fact, if I were Patrick Swayze and given the "death sentence", I would be almost Over-Dosing on some 99% Resveratrol right now! (Didn't somebody in the forum mentioned it helped with Pancreatic Cancer?) Also, with his money, I would probably be on the Internet day and night (maybe he is) trying to find "Anything" promising in or out of any clinical trial anywhere in the world!!!!!
Comments?????
#62
Posted 12 February 2009 - 10:17 PM
Scientists now think that certain people carry a genetic mutation CCR5 that prevents HIV infection.
Sounds eerily similar to transplanting leukocytes from people with genetic mutations that prevent cancer, as established by one Dr. Cui...
http://www.independe...iv-1607227.html
Too bad the f%ckfaces at the FDA won't allow him to conduct his clinical trial.
#63
Posted 13 February 2009 - 03:22 AM
Edited by joe57777, 13 February 2009 - 03:25 AM.
#64
Posted 13 February 2009 - 03:57 AM
You think the American Cancer Society is suppressing cures in order to make money? That's pretty offensive. Got any evidence?Comments?????
#65
Posted 13 February 2009 - 06:32 PM
If the FDA or whoever thinks that Zheng Cui's research is insufficient to try it in humans, they should be told (by someone here in contact with them?) that Chris Heward, a very respectful scientist who had terminal cancer, was very supportive if it. Ideally some scientists (maybe Chris Heward's team) should study Cui's research and discuss with them (or recognize that the clinical trial is not worth!).
Meanwhile I foresee the possibility for some of us to receive normal-mice and normal-mice-made-cancer-resistant at home, eg coming from Cui's lab (with a warrantied age at reception) in order to check that normal-mice-made-cancer-resistant do not particularly develop tumors and perhaps live longer. This would of course require someone to be in contact with Zheng Cui's lab.
#66
Posted 13 February 2009 - 08:59 PM
Link to the recorded call here.
#67
Posted 14 February 2009 - 04:27 AM
You think the American Cancer Society is suppressing cures in order to make money? That's pretty offensive. Got any evidence?Comments?????
Well I have to admit, I am not the person who has accused the American Cancer Society of suppressing cures in order to make money. I am simply a person who agrees with the accuser. Here is the article which will point out who is the actual accuser of this: http://www.naturalnews.com/021892.html
Edited by joe57777, 14 February 2009 - 04:32 AM.
#68
Posted 15 February 2009 - 11:50 AM
Great job Mind!!!Ok, I called the Wake Forest University PR department to find out what is going on. I had to really press and get aggressive to get anything out of them. The lady even asked "why are you being so aggressive?". Finally she said (as Age Vivo mentioned) that they are still going through paperwork and the regulatory process and that the earliest the trial will get going is late Spring (like May or June). She also said nothing unethical was going on and that was not the reason why the trial has been held up.
Link to the recorded call here.
So the trial is still under preparation, it is 'just' that it is taking long, for uncommunicated reasons.
From what i heard about clinical trials in general: it is quite some work to establish the exact procedure and make it validated, know who is going to deliver which compound in a way that it is a double-blind study, find the patients (can be very tricky because of requiered health restrictions and measurements). The speed depends a lot on the activeness of the main medical doctor in charge of the process, it often takes more than a year, except if there is a strong lobying behind.
#69
Posted 15 February 2009 - 12:36 PM
#70
Posted 15 February 2009 - 09:31 PM
She does have a point about seasonality. I don't know how representative this slide is, but it appears that the seasonality effect can be huge. The wait for summer might just make all the difference."internal and regulatory regulations"
seasonality_small.jpg 37.71KB 10 downloads
#71
Posted 26 February 2009 - 08:59 AM
"It will launch a new effort to conquer a disease that has touched the life of nearly every American, including me, by seeking a cure for cancer in our time," Obama said.
http://cbs2chicago.c...e.2.944009.html
Edited by theone, 26 February 2009 - 09:00 AM.
#72
Posted 07 March 2009 - 06:55 PM
Cancer cure may be available in two years (end 2007)
http://www.telegraph.....o-years'.html
Great news
Prof Cui injected granulocytes from cancer-immune mice into ordinary mice. A single dose of the cells appeared to give many of the mice resistance to cancer for the rest of their lives. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) last week gave Dr Cui permission to inject super-strength granulocytes into 22 patients. Dr Cui said: “Our hope is that this could be a cure. Our pre-clinical tests have been exceptionally successful.
Warning1
Prof Gribben warned the US researchers would have to be careful to avoid other immune system cells from the donor proliferating in the patient’s body. He added: “If they’re using live cells there is a theoretical risk of graft-versus-host disease, which can prove fatal.” Dr Cui said he is working on ways to minimise this risk.
Warning2
Granulocyte transfusion has previously been used to try to prevent infections in cancer patients whose immune systems have been weakened by chemotherapy. However their effectiveness has been unclear because they have mainly been given to patients in an advanced stage of disease.
* * *
My interpretation is that warning2 is not blocking because in the past granulocytes were not selected from cancer-immune people, and warning1 isn't blocking because granucolyte transfusion has been repeatedly done already (as said in warning2). So i personally have large hope in this clinical trial and i would regret it for long if it is not tested.
#73
Posted 11 April 2009 - 02:32 AM
It looks as though Zheng Cui has signed up with Munogenics to develop his granulocyte transplantation cancer treatment. Hopefully this will get things moving quickly.here are rearranged extracts from a nice journalist explanation of Zhen Cui's anti-cancer results in mice and the potential application in humans:
Cancer cure may be available in two years (end 2007)
http://www.telegraph.....o-years'.html
Great news
Prof Cui injected granulocytes from cancer-immune mice into ordinary mice. A single dose of the cells appeared to give many of the mice resistance to cancer for the rest of their lives. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) last week gave Dr Cui permission to inject super-strength granulocytes into 22 patients. Dr Cui said: "Our hope is that this could be a cure. Our pre-clinical tests have been exceptionally successful.
Warning1
Prof Gribben warned the US researchers would have to be careful to avoid other immune system cells from the donor proliferating in the patient's body. He added: "If they're using live cells there is a theoretical risk of graft-versus-host disease, which can prove fatal." Dr Cui said he is working on ways to minimise this risk.
Warning2
Granulocyte transfusion has previously been used to try to prevent infections in cancer patients whose immune systems have been weakened by chemotherapy. However their effectiveness has been unclear because they have mainly been given to patients in an advanced stage of disease.
* * *
My interpretation is that warning2 is not blocking because in the past granulocytes were not selected from cancer-immune people, and warning1 isn't blocking because granucolyte transfusion has been repeatedly done already (as said in warning2). So i personally have large hope in this clinical trial and i would regret it for long if it is not tested.
See http://express-press.....ECH GROUP.php
#75
Posted 16 April 2009 - 09:09 PM
#76
Posted 21 April 2009 - 06:22 AM
I heard Dr. Cui's clincal trial has been hold by only fund problem.
1. The CKA(cancer killing activity) level. Maybe it was occured by different HLA Type between HELA cancer cell and test granulocyte.
Does the difference of HLA type make granulocyte attack cancer cell?
2. If select porper donor(Match HLA type and high CKA level), does the possibility of Dr. Cui's trial success high?
3. Breast cancer vaccine, I want some information.
#77
Posted 24 April 2009 - 09:29 PM
I think this is probably true, but nobody knows for sure.I heard Dr. Cui's clincal trial has been hold by only fund problem.
Granulocytes are not known to recognize HLA differences.1. The CKA(cancer killing activity) level. Maybe it was occured by different HLA Type between HELA cancer cell and test granulocyte.
Does the difference of HLA type make granulocyte attack cancer cell?
Nothing is know about the probability of "success" (however you define that) at this point.2. If select porper donor(Match HLA type and high CKA level), does the possibility of Dr. Cui's trial success high?
Granulocytes do not directly respond to vaccines. So this is a different topic.3. Breast cancer vaccine, I want some information.
#78
Posted 24 April 2009 - 09:32 PM
I don't understand what's up with this non-exclusive license to Muno. Is this how Wake Forest tries to attract investors with actual money?!I can't figure out why they can't find support or funding? Transfusing granulocytes is apparently an expensive venture...
#79
Posted 11 May 2009 - 01:41 PM
100% cure is on condition that SEX and MHC match condition.
If donor and recipant are sex and MHC mismatch condition, the female recipants survival rate is only about 15%.
This is maybe hide to announce or missed.
If that is true, the donor selection is too difficult.
High CKA level and sex and MHC have to match.
This is organ transplantation hard.
hmmmmm... I disappointed.
Attached Files
#80
Posted 11 May 2009 - 03:19 PM
where can we find the corresponding *text* to know what those graphs are about, precisely?
#81
Posted 13 May 2009 - 07:28 AM
http://www.cbs12.com...ells-white.html
#82
Posted 13 May 2009 - 02:23 PM
#83
Posted 13 May 2009 - 10:20 PM
Talked to Researcher #1 today. Very friendly guy. He could tell I was an undergrad, but he considered the questions to be sophisticated and thought-provoking.
A. So, has anyone looked at human leukocytes killing tumors in vitro?
R #1 says such an assay would face the serious technical difficulty of the need for autologous tumors. I think the point being, that if it's not an autologous tumor, of course the leukocytes will attack it, and the other point being, if it is an autologous tumor, then apparently the leukocytes aren't working anyway. (Didn't get around to my question D.) So as far as he knows, this hasn't been done.B. Are there people we can safely say are "cancer-resistant", and has anyone looked at their leukocytes?
C. What about the leukocytes of centenarians and their progeny?
Grouping these together, he thought that C was intriguing. He referred me to papers by Donin et. al. (1995). It's all very confusing.
No answers for D-F... He hadn't read the Hicks paper and told me I could call him next week after he looks at it (he's in the field, so he was going to get around to it anyway.)
As for the evolutionary stuff: this guy has written a review in which he makes the case that the immune response actually stimulates tumor progression in a lot of cases. Oy vey.
I don't think people can safely say they are cancer resistant, but there are supplements that help. Red wine (in moderation) is key (if you can drink alcohol!)
#84
Posted 14 May 2009 - 08:41 AM
#85
Posted 14 May 2009 - 07:37 PM
is the travel paid? even for non-US citizens?We estimate that at least four visits to the South Florida Bone Marrow/Stem Cell Transplant Institute (SFBMSCTI) in Boynton Beach, Florida will be needed for each qualified donor.
Edited by AgeVivo, 14 May 2009 - 08:04 PM.
#86
Posted 18 May 2009 - 02:04 PM
The reason is that lost priniciple investigator.
Dr. Cui is not principle investigator.
Very disappointed.
I can not understand Wake Foest University.
Easy change principle investigator.
Why trial postpone?
#87
Posted 18 May 2009 - 02:11 PM
#88
Posted 18 May 2009 - 02:33 PM
Hi Dytona, where did you hear that the Cui trial was postponed indefinitely?
The munogenics Dr. Beau Raines said.
Very disappointed news
#89
Posted 18 May 2009 - 06:20 PM
By the looks of it the technology being used is available world wide. Why not duplicate this treatment in other facilities or even other countries. For example in a related post I mentioned that Chinese centers now offering Lymphocyte/NK cell transfusion
http://www.imminst.o...showtopic=29973
They might not be the same Cell types, however the extraction technique looks very similar. I am fairly confident that if we look hard enough we can find Dr. Zheng Cui's technique being duplicated in other countries.
Edited by theone, 18 May 2009 - 06:21 PM.
#90
Posted 18 May 2009 - 07:51 PM
Mind, it might be a good time to call, ask questions (eg do donors pay, when can we start applying, is there a planned starting date, etc), record and post it here!
I thing it is great time to sign as donors in order to ease the process. It can only help
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users