Cheap Non-Patented Drug Kills Most Cancers

By Angsuman Chakraborty, Gaea News Network
Saturday, February 3, 2007

Investigators at the University of Alberta have recently reported that the drug DCA is able to cause tumor regression in a number of human cancers growing in animals.

The drug, dichloroacetate (DCA), is being used for years to treat rare metabolic disorders and is known to be relatively safe. It is also not protected by patents and hence could be made very cheaply, much cheaper than normal anti-cancer drugs.

The best part is that DCA (dichloroacetate) actually makes the cancer cells healthy by reactivating their mitochondria, their main power generator, which in turn makes cancer cells mortal like the other cells. The drug doesn’t affect the normal cells of the body.

Evangelos Michelakis of the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada, and his colleagues tested DCA on human cells cultured outside the body and found that it killed lung, breast and brain cancer cells, but not healthy cells. Tumours in rats deliberately infected with human cancer also shrank drastically when they were fed DCA-laced water for several weeks.

DCA attacks an unique feature of cancer cells: the fact that they make their energy throughout the main body of the cell, rather than in mitochondria as is in normal cells. This process, called glycolysis, is inefficient and uses up vast amounts of sugar. Until now it had been assumed that cancer cells used glycolysis because their mitochondria were irreparably damaged. However, Michelakis’s experiments prove this is not the case, because DCA reawakened the mitochondria in cancer cells. The cancer cells then withered and died.

Michelakis suggests that the switch to glycolysis as an energy source occurs when cells in the middle of an abnormal but benign lump don’t get enough oxygen for their mitochondria to work properly (see Diagram). In order to survive, they switch off their mitochondria and start producing energy through glycolysis.

Crucially, though, mitochondria do another job in cells: they activate apoptosis, the process by which abnormal cells self-destruct. When cells switch mitochondria off, they become “immortal”, outliving other cells in the tumour and so becoming dominant. Once reawakened by DCA, mitochondria reactivate apoptosis and order the abnormal cells to die.

This also explains how secondary cancers form. Glycolysis generates lactic acid, which can break down the collagen matrix holding cells together. This means abnormal cells can be released and float to other parts of the body, where they seed new tumours.

This re-kindles the old debate whether cancer is sparked by metabolism or mutation. This research tends to indicate metabolism as the primary cause.

The University of Alberta and the Alberta Cancer Board are committed to performing clinical trials in the immediate future in consultation with regulatory agencies such as Health Canada.

They believe that because DCA has been used on human beings in Phase 1 and Phase 2 trials of metabolic diseases, the cancer clinical trials timeline for our research will be much shorter than usual.

Source: New Scientist, University of Alberta

Discussion

Beverly Orefice
November 8, 2007: 7:08 pm

If this DCA can cure cancers, it would be a miracle for a lot of people. I have a friend who has been like a brother to me for over 25 years. He has advanced prostate cancer. Once the treatment he is on bottoms out, there is nowhere to go, so he will go to Canada to see if he can get treated with DCA. Human lives should come before money-making, for Gods’ sake!


Ian Georgii
March 31, 2007: 2:30 am

Very interesting article, but I wonder how the money-hungry pharma-industrial complex would react if DCA (a ‘bulk’ chemical, as is it’s precursor acetic acid - read vinegar!) is the magic bullet. If they decide that there is no future in researching and developing new chemo- & radio-logical methods, then all we might be left with in a few years would be surgery and DCA. Cutting, many would say, is still very crude at the cellular level. The postulate here is that invasion might spread the tumor and then the ONLY method available might be DCA: if that is ineffective or contra-indicated for the patient, then the patient has a very poor prognosis.
What we probably require is for governments to recognise the very fast paced nature of modern chemistry (in all its forms) and cause the expedition of agents that appear at an early stage to be at once efficacious and yet ’safe’. The ’safeness’ being examined in the trials. In the UK, whether or not a drug is licensed by our government, there is the politially motivated (read save-money-at-all-costs) NICE (a meaningless acronym or more properly, oxymoron) would hamper its use. Paradoxically not because it is cheap and safe and useful, but because it threatens their own existence - you dont need multiple layers of ‘cost saving’ flannel if you can pop down the hardware store and cure yourself!

ps, What would happen inside WHO as they begin to see THEIR ’save-the-world-and-look-good’ position being threatened. The scenario is: we have removed smallpox(?!), reduced polio, twiddled our thumbs over cholera, messed around with malaria, and now you come along and cure cancer for a few dollars per ton of pills!

It is not so much the workings of a ‘drug’ that is the problem for the governments, it is that this is seen as a threat to their carefully laid administrivia!!

Regards,
Ian Georgii (UK)

YOUR VIEW POINT
NAME : (REQUIRED)
MAIL : (REQUIRED)
will not be displayed
WEBSITE : (OPTIONAL)
YOUR
COMMENT :