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

Photo
* * * * * 2 votes

Trodusquemine Reverse Plaque - Group Buy Share Data

arterial plaque trodusquemine msi-1436 cardiovascular disease coronary arteries carotid arteries calcification mouse study cancer diabetes

  • Please log in to reply
282 replies to this topic

#271 mikey

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 979 posts
  • 161
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 25 July 2019 - 02:49 AM

The problem with these rat studies is that rats seem very much not prone to getting atherosclerosis.  You have to genetically design them to get it or you have to feed them very high fat diets that they almost never consume naturally.

 

Given that rats really "don't want to have atherosclerosis", it seems that most interventions work pretty well in reversing it in them.  Many of these interventions don't seem to pan out in humans unfortunately.

 

Are there any human studies that show a good effect in humans for vitamin K (mk4 or mk7) halting or reversing atherosclerosis?  I looked several years ago and the only thing I could find were rat studies and human population studies (which aren't great at teasing out cause and effect - too many confounding factors).

 

I know there was that human study underway at the University of Maastricht.  It should have completed a year or two ago but I haven't seen anything published (though I haven't looked in awhile).  I did converse with one of the authors but he wouldn't talk about any of the findings.

 

This is really off topic for this thread btw.  We have a thread on reversing arterial plaque.  It was started by a really swell guy if I recall  ;) .

 

For some reason this forum with the word "trodusquemine," which symbolizes complete regeneration, is more magnetic to me than the other thread.  ;)

The hyperlinked study text below describes the mechanism for arterial calcification. If MGP (Matrix Gla Protein) is not carboxylated because there isn't enough vitamin K (2, especially) in circulation, then the endothelium (inner linings) of the arteries are ripe for calcification. 

 

Matrix Gla Protein (MGP), a small Gla vitamin K-dependent protein, is the most powerful naturally occurring inhibitor of calcification in the human body. To become biologically active, MGP must undergo vitamin K-dependent carboxylation and phosphorylation. Vitamin K deficiency leads to the inactive uncarboxylated, dephosphorylated form of MGP (dpucMGP). 
-------------------------------------------

 

Whether humans or rats, this is the mechanism. Calcium in the blood stream either has guidance from fully carboxylated MGP - into bones and teeth and away from soft tissue or.... we have cardiovascular disease - calcified arteries, renal calcification/kidney stones, soft tissue calcification, in general, and on the other side, loss of calcium from bones. 

Calcium needs to be "guided."

Here is another look - https://www.ncbi.nlm...1?dopt=Abstract


Hopefully, this provides some clarity about why it is prudent to regularly take a vitamin K2(MK-7) supplement over the long-term.

 

The study you referred to was described to me by Dr. Leon Schurgers of Maastrich University when he came to California to visit and chat about vitamin K2 in 2015.

He told me that since 180 mcg of vitamin K2 (MK-7) had been shown to decrease arterial stiffness, which basically means having more flexible arteries - in healthy postmenopausal women, they were going to do a study with 360 mcg of MK-7 with postmenopausal women that had measurable arterial calcification/cardiovascular disease and use an advanced imaging technique, so that the study could be completed in a year, rather than take three years. 

 

I have been searching for the results of that study since the time its results were supposed to have been released and have not seen it.
 

Regardless of whether the study remains unpublished, the hundreds of studies that detail vitamin Ks role in potentially reducing human arterial calcification mandate that I take it regularly as a supplement (300-500 mcg of vitamin K2-MK7/day) AND consume foods that are rich in it. They're tasty, too!
 


Edited by mikey, 25 July 2019 - 02:51 AM.


#272 Daniel Cooper

  • Guest
  • 1,041 posts
  • 173
  • Location:USA

Posted 25 July 2019 - 01:26 PM

I hear what you're saying about "trodusquemine".  Sounds like the holy grail of atherosclerosis treatment.

 

Still, we might want to keep this thread dedicated to it on the off chance that we find a affordable source for it or there is new news in the future.

 

If you have an "in" with the guys at Maastrich University, perhaps you could ping then and they might tell you at least when they expect to publish.  We've had so many potential treatments that work in lab animals but don't work in humans that it would be nice to see at least one clinical trial that showed actual plaque regression in a human study.

 

The Reversing Arterial Plaque thread that you started is starting to get long, but it is a decent central clearing house of information on this subject.  Or perhaps we should start an "Atherosclerosis and Vitamin K2" thread if one does not already exist (I haven't looked but don't recall one).

 

Anyone that reads up on the state of atherosclerosis treatment in any detail has to be extremely frustrated.  Doctors are pushing statins like they own stock in the company (perhaps they do) but I look at the evidence and I just don't see it.  Yes, there is some small benefit.  But nothing to write home about.  And certainly nothing that I see that justifies the enthusiasm for these drugs.  Nothing that would justify to me this being a $12B/year drug class in the US alone.  Due to the limited benefit and the side effects, I have so far elected to not take statins.  But, even though I've done my due diligence and think I'm making the right decision, you can't help but have a little fear that maybe you're not making the right decision given that all the guys with the fancy letters after their name love them so much.

 

I am convinced that a proper treatment for atherosclerosis is out there, and that likely we've talked about it here on Longevity at some point (in fact there are probably more than one instance of this).  But, given that many of these are not patentable no one is going to spend the money to do a proper study, and the ones that are patentable will be held up in a well neigh never ending drug approval process.  In the interim, millions will drop dead from fatal heart attacks.  But, apparently those people don't count.

 

Our drug development and approval system is so utterly broken.

 

 



sponsored ad

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

#273 Daniel Cooper

  • Guest
  • 1,041 posts
  • 173
  • Location:USA

Posted 25 July 2019 - 01:35 PM

Speaking of new news on trodusquemine, I just saw this -
 
Novo Biosciences achieves major milestones in moving trodusquemine into clinical trials

 

 

 



#274 mikey

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 979 posts
  • 161
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 25 July 2019 - 03:13 PM

I hear what you're saying about "trodusquemine".  Sounds like the holy grail of atherosclerosis treatment.

 

Still, we might want to keep this thread dedicated to it on the off chance that we find a affordable source for it or there is new news in the future.

 

If you have an "in" with the guys at Maastrich University, perhaps you could ping then and they might tell you at least when they expect to publish.  We've had so many potential treatments that work in lab animals but don't work in humans that it would be nice to see at least one clinical trial that showed actual plaque regression in a human study.

 

The Reversing Arterial Plaque thread that you started is starting to get long, but it is a decent central clearing house of information on this subject.  Or perhaps we should start an "Atherosclerosis and Vitamin K2" thread if one does not already exist (I haven't looked but don't recall one).

 

Anyone that reads up on the state of atherosclerosis treatment in any detail has to be extremely frustrated.  Doctors are pushing statins like they own stock in the company (perhaps they do) but I look at the evidence and I just don't see it.  Yes, there is some small benefit.  But nothing to write home about.  And certainly nothing that I see that justifies the enthusiasm for these drugs.  Nothing that would justify to me this being a $12B/year drug class in the US alone.  Due to the limited benefit and the side effects, I have so far elected to not take statins.  But, even though I've done my due diligence and think I'm making the right decision, you can't help but have a little fear that maybe you're not making the right decision given that all the guys with the fancy letters after their name love them so much.

 

I am convinced that a proper treatment for atherosclerosis is out there, and that likely we've talked about it here on Longevity at some point (in fact there are probably more than one instance of this).  But, given that many of these are not patentable no one is going to spend the money to do a proper study, and the ones that are patentable will be held up in a well neigh never ending drug approval process.  In the interim, millions will drop dead from fatal heart attacks.  But, apparently those people don't count.

 

Our drug development and approval system is so utterly broken.

 

I agree with what you’re saying about keeping this thread open, Daniel. We do want Trodusquemine, so let’s ride it out.

I will send a note to Leon Schurgers asking him what happened to that trial. I didn’t want to pester him, but he will see that it’s a good question, since it did seem important to him when we spoke.

 

An “Atherosclerosis and Vitamin K2” thread could be a result of communication with Leon. Let’s hope.

 

As to statins, I will NEVER take statins. They permanently damage mitochondria, unless you somehow reverse the damage, as Turnbuckle did with C60oo.

I know many doctors, PhDs, supposedly learned people have little to offer regarding cutting edge healthcare. Education and degrees can mean nothing useful, or even amount to them being in the "statin-chorus" which will not suit advanced life-extending healthcare. Statins are not proven to extend life - unless one considers a whopping 3.2 and 4.1 days to be life-extending.

 

IT'S FOOD AND SUPPLEMENT CONSUMPTION THAT COUNTS
Further, my adverse blood lipids consistently respond to my consumption of a very low carbohydrate diet, along with appropriate dietary supplements. It’s work to cut the carbs out. Like gremlins, they chase us from inside our heads. It's also work to take supplements consistently.

But it works. I’ve done three comprehensive blood tests. The first, eating relatively low carbs – definitely not what I am capable of – resulted in an erratic comprehensive lipid panel.

 

I became extremely motivated to eat a VERY clean diet, which resulted in my next lipid panel presenting superb.

 

It was so good that my MD and the most astute cardiovascular doctor I’ve ever met, Dr. Richard Tau, was amazed at how “clean” it was. (Dr. Tau is a proponent of a vegan diet. I was consuming very high fat, high cholesterol, low carb, moderate protein foods.)

 

The next blood test I had slightly fallen off the wagon, and it showed some good and some bad markers.

 

I am currently the best I can be as I move into working with a Professor of Naturopathy that knows about complex blood panels and natural health care. I am determined to break the mold of who I’ve been and exceed myself into the future.


Edited by mikey, 25 July 2019 - 03:15 PM.


#275 mikey

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 979 posts
  • 161
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 26 July 2019 - 04:24 AM

Speaking of new news on trodusquemine, I just saw this -

Novo Biosciences achieves major milestones in moving trodusquemine into clinical trials


Right on our timetable, which is sooner than later!

#276 Daniel Cooper

  • Guest
  • 1,041 posts
  • 173
  • Location:USA

Posted 26 July 2019 - 11:29 AM

Right on our timetable, which is sooner than later!

 

The problem with this news is that FDA approval is still years away, and when it happens it looks like it's essentially being developed as a orphan drug for diseases that affect a very small number of people.  Consequently, I expect when they finally do get FDA approval, the cost will be astronomical.

 

Of course, once they get that approval maybe they will be able to expand the applications for this drug and the costs will come down, but we are talking about many years before that happens.

 

Like I said, our drug approval process is just so abysmally broken at this point.  Our FDA and analogous drug approval agencies in other Western countries only seem to look at the risk of letting bad drugs onto the market.  They never seem to consider the cost in human lives of keeping a good drug off the market for an additional decade or two, or in some cases ... forever.  If your drug candidate can't make say US$10B over the course of a decade or so, it's just not going to ever be release because it now cost somewhere in the vicinity of US$3B to get it approved.  Meanwhile the bodies keep stacking up.



#277 mikey

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 979 posts
  • 161
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 26 July 2019 - 02:09 PM

The problem with this news is that FDA approval is still years away, and when it happens it looks like it's essentially being developed as a orphan drug for diseases that affect a very small number of people.  Consequently, I expect when they finally do get FDA approval, the cost will be astronomical.

 

Of course, once they get that approval maybe they will be able to expand the applications for this drug and the costs will come down, but we are talking about many years before that happens.

 

Like I said, our drug approval process is just so abysmally broken at this point.  Our FDA and analogous drug approval agencies in other Western countries only seem to look at the risk of letting bad drugs onto the market.  They never seem to consider the cost in human lives of keeping a good drug off the market for an additional decade or two, or in some cases ... forever.  If your drug candidate can't make say US$10B over the course of a decade or so, it's just not going to ever be release because it now cost somewhere in the vicinity of US$3B to get it approved.  Meanwhile the bodies keep stacking up.

 

All agreed. What happens is the classic line, "stick around for the cure."  Hopefully, it goes through trials to become FDA-approved for a disease or two. This causes radically increased manufacturing, which brings the cost way down.

I expect that it will still be costly, so insurance won't cover "off-label" prescriptions. So save your pennies. When it is an FDA-approved drug I want to be able to afford paying for it, at a much lower price than now. And then perhaps we will find it available for lower costs from other countries.

This is a huge step forward. As is said, "Stick around for the cure."


Edited by mikey, 26 July 2019 - 02:10 PM.


#278 Daniel Cooper

  • Guest
  • 1,041 posts
  • 173
  • Location:USA

Posted 26 July 2019 - 02:12 PM

Maybe if it gets approved in the US it will be approved in Europe around the same time.  I'm betting I can get on a plane and go to Prague and get this cheaper than I can get it in the US.  And I hear Prague is a lovely city.

 

We do btw need some human clinical data showing that it actually works in man.

 

Faster please.

 

 

 



#279 mikey

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 979 posts
  • 161
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 28 August 2019 - 01:50 PM

Maybe if it gets approved in the US it will be approved in Europe around the same time.  I'm betting I can get on a plane and go to Prague and get this cheaper than I can get it in the US.  And I hear Prague is a lovely city.

 

We do btw need some human clinical data showing that it actually works in man.

 

Faster please.

 

Works, yes. But especially that it causes no harm in humans.

Or perhaps Thailand or Singapore would cost much less?
https://www.theriche...est-healthcare/

 

Thank you, again, Daniel, for making known that Trodusquemine is going into clinical trials in the US.



#280 arnie

  • Guest
  • 2 posts
  • 4
  • Location:Australia
  • NO

Posted 11 September 2019 - 04:31 AM

Hi folks, google steered me in this direction. This is a very long thread....lol
May I ask advice as a layman?
I’m 58 and have 2 stents. My cardiologist insists that I continue on my statins and plavix as he claims I run the risk of more blockages around the stents.

trodusquemine Sounds like what I need but clinical trials of such things down here in Australia are impossible to find. Is it pointless taking the statins?

#281 mikey

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 979 posts
  • 161
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 11 September 2019 - 12:44 PM

Hi folks, google steered me in this direction. This is a very long thread....lol
May I ask advice as a layman?
I’m 58 and have 2 stents. My cardiologist insists that I continue on my statins and plavix as he claims I run the risk of more blockages around the stents.

trodusquemine Sounds like what I need but clinical trials of such things down here in Australia are impossible to find. Is it pointless taking the statins?

 

American cardiologists, in general, are shills for drugs and procedures. I avoid them.

We wait for trodusquemine's price to come down, now that it is being studied to become a prescription.

 

Statins are absolutely to be avoided. They permanently damage mitochondria. Ask Turnbuckle about his experience with them. Further, no credible data shows statins extending lifespan. There is only weak evidence of benefit for some middle-aged men. 

 

When I eat a low-carbohydrate diet my blood lipids look great. Carbs, in general, fuel the blood lipid profiles that predict plaque build-up.Healthy fats historically are good for us. Please see: Fat of the Land.

 

My blood pressure has come down to being like I was 40 years younger (I am 66), likely because of my use of 3 grams of L-taurine along with three grams of trimethylglycine (lowers inflammatory homo-cysteine) before bedtime, but MORE LIKELY of greater important, my near daily 5-6 minute use of a VMAX Elite PowerPlate Whole Body Vibration (WBV) machine (at high intensity - 38 Hz.) as an add-on to exercising, such as walking and weights. 

Low carbs and exercise/PowerPlate are my formula for me. BTW: I have no stents, a history of some coronary and carotid plaque appearance and higher blood pressure (five+ years ago) than I have now. I will re-do scans at some point.

Good luck finding your way through the maze of concepts and advice.

Truly, what we eat and exercise do the most for the cardiovascular system over the long-term. Trodusquemine could be the magic bullet that re-generates cardiovascular systems that have suffered abuse.


Edited by mikey, 11 September 2019 - 12:48 PM.


#282 mikey

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 979 posts
  • 161
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 11 September 2019 - 12:52 PM

Hi folks, google steered me in this direction. This is a very long thread....lol
May I ask advice as a layman?
I’m 58 and have 2 stents. My cardiologist insists that I continue on my statins and plavix as he claims I run the risk of more blockages around the stents.

trodusquemine Sounds like what I need but clinical trials of such things down here in Australia are impossible to find. Is it pointless taking the statins?

 

You may want to read post 510 at https://www.longecit...-plaque/page-17



sponsored ad

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

#283 Rocket

  • Guest
  • 819 posts
  • 105
  • Location:Usa
  • NO

Posted 15 September 2019 - 12:31 AM

I think keeping the liver healthy is important for lipids and often overlooked. I don't have before and after bloods because my lipids have been good all along (knock on wood). But I take tudca religiously for liver health. Doc is always amazed how good my liver looks in blood tests. Without tudca liver enzymes will run high. Seen that in my blood panels. But even when I have used substances for muscle that wreck lipids, my lipids are what some people are not taking these chemicals and eating right... People I know with not so good numbers. They are not good but not incredibly horrible either. That's eating like pig during bulk cycles.

Liver health and lipids is also why I don't touch alcohol.

Maybe someone smarter than me can comment on my hypothesis.

Oh milk thistle basically worthless for me. Tudca the only thing that works.

I've also started K until something of this subjects drug can be bought by me. I also eat a few spoons of coconut oil daily.

Also considering inflammation is key to myocardial infractions I wonder if c60OO is beneficial here. Anyone? Anyone on c60 ever had a heart attack?

Edited by Rocket, 15 September 2019 - 12:35 AM.






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: arterial plaque, trodusquemine, msi-1436, cardiovascular disease, coronary arteries, carotid arteries, calcification, mouse study, cancer, diabetes

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users