Investigating what happened to Sodium Dichloroacetate DCA (NaDCA) is a form of neutralized dichloroacetic acid (dichloroacetate or DCA), the non-toxic cancer cure discovered by a large Canadian University in 2007. The short answer is they have had to raise the money for clinical trials from the public, and that DCA worked the same in humans as it did in the lab!
In 2007 it was discovered that the drug DCA (dichloroacetate sodium) induced the death of human breast, lung and brain cancer cells that were implanted into rats, while being non-toxic to healthy cells. This research was published in Cancer Cell, January 2007. DCA has been found to kill cancer cells by a newly discovered mechanism that appears to be common to several types of cancer. DCA is a synthetic drug, but it is a very simple compound similar to a chemical combination of salt and vinegar. It works by turning on the natural cell suicide system (called apoptosis) which is suppressed in cancerous cells, thus allowing them to die on their own. DCA does not poison the cells like cytotoxic chemotherapy drugs. DCA also interferes with the cancer cell’s use of glucose, starving the cell of energy. At the same time, it does not starve healthy cells in the body of glucose.
DCA cancer research continues over a decade after the original publication in Cancer Cell. The latest research shows that DCA also kills many types of cancer cells, and can boost the cancer-killing effects of radiation. The first formal human cancer research using DCA was published in May 2010. It confirmed that DCA is an effective anti-cancer drug for treating glioblastoma patients (Metabolic Modulation of Glioblastoma with Dichloroacetate, Science Transitional Medicine, Vol 2, Issue 31). MEDLINE is the largest medical database in the world, and contains information on published DCA research. This database can be searched free of charge for those interested in reading DCA Research, or the summaries of the DCA publications.
The Warburg effect is named for Otto Warburg, M.D., Ph.D., a German physiologist who won a Nobel Prize in 1931 for his work investigating the metabolism of tumors and the respiration of cancer cells. He is the namesake of two observations in biochemistry: a pathway in plant physiology and another pathway in oncology.
Warburg hypothesized that cancer growth stemmed from tumor cells generating energy—called adenosine triphosphate, or ATP—through the anaerobic breakdown of glucose, known as fermentation. This is in contrast to normal cells, which get energy from converted glucose called pyruvate in a process known as glycolysis.
In a biographical sketch of Warburg chronicled by the National Institutes of Health, Warburg said this about his hypothesis during a 1966 lecture:
“Cancer, above all other diseases, has countless secondary causes. But, even for cancer, there is only one prime cause … the replacement of the respiration of oxygen in normal body cells by a fermentation of sugar.”
By activating SRC-3, the Warburg pathway unleashes one of the most potent oncogenes responsible for the spread of breast and other cancers.
“It is the second-most expressed oncogene in all of the human cancers,” O’Malley said. “Normally, it plays a nice little function to keep the cell going, but when it gets over-activated, the cancer cell uses it to drive all of the processes for cell division and replication.”
This happens when the sugar activates the PFKFB4 enzyme, which then phosphorylates the SRC-3 oncogene, making it go from inactive to active and stimulating all the genes to grow the cancer.
Generating cell energy
Though some cells choose the Warburg pathway to make ATP, it is not the only way normal cells produce energy from glucose.
The other way takes place in the mitochondria—the powerhouse of the cell—which yields significantly more energy than theWarburg pathway, explained O’Malley, who also served as Baylor’s Thomas C. Thompson Chair in Cell Biology and associate director of basic research in the Dan L Duncan Comprehensive Cancer Center.
Still, about 80 percent of cancer cells switch to the Warburg pathway, preferring to generate ATP via fermentation, he noted.
“Cancer cells need a lot of energy, so people have wondered why the cancer cells do this,” O’Malley said. “They have hypothesized that this pathway must provide other things the cancer cells want. That is the mystery we shed new light on with our study—that the Warburg is also activating the SRC-3 oncogene that drives the cancer cell to grow.”
The findings appear in a paper in the April 12, 2018 issue of the journal Nature. Subhamoy Dasgupta, Ph.D., the first author on the study, is an assistant professor of oncology at Roswell Park who completed his post-doctoral fellowship in O’Malley’s lab at Baylor.
Removing PFKFB4 or SRC-3 from the tumors suppresses breast tumor growth in the study’s mice model, Dasgupta explained in the abstract.
This is a difficult subject to explain without people viewing it as a conspiracy theory. We simply wish to provide information that most people can understand and believe from respected medical publications about this discovery. We probably would have left this story alone, but too many things did not make sense. Like why no funding from the many Cancer charities that we donate too, or the Government agencies set up to fund cancer research with our tax dollars? Two of the government agencies that funded the original discovery, did not provide any further funding for clinical trials.
We could understand the drug companies not wanting to fund research for a cheap nontoxic cure for cancer, but we think a reasonable person would simply assume the charities and government agencies would! After all, “finding a cure” is what they claim to be their objective. We expect, like ourselves most people donate thinking that their money will go towards finding that cure! Don’t take this the wrong way, the Cancer Societies at a regional level provide an amazing service, it is at the national level that they deceive the people that donate or volunteer into believing that the charity is actively pursuing a cure!
What we discovered will astound you, enrage you, and inspire you, and the evidence was all online published in prominent medical journals. Everything you believed about cancer and treatment will be turned upside down!
Sodium dichloroacetate DCA (NaDCA) a simple molecule discovered by the University of Alberta to shrink tumors by reversing the Warburg Effect. Otto Warburg was one of the most respected scientists in the history of cancer research. He won a noble prize for his work on cancer cell metabolism. We could try to explain it, but for you to realize the importance of this discovery it is best if you hear it in his own words.
The following quote is an excerpt from a lecture originally delivered by O. Warburg at the 1966 annual meeting of Nobelists at Lindau, Germany. The full lecture can be found Linked on here Please take the time to read it, his ideas on cancer prevention are as sound today as they were in 1966.
There are prime and secondary causes of diseases. For example, the prime cause of the plague is the plague bacillus, but secondary causes of the plague are filth, rats, and the fleas that transfer the plague bacillus from rats to man. By a prime cause of a disease I mean one that is found in every case of the disease.
Cancer, above all other diseases, has countless secondary causes. But, even for cancer, there is only one prime cause. Summarized in a few words, the prime cause of cancer is the replacement of the respiration of oxygen in normal body cells by a fermentation of sugar. All normal body cells meet their energy needs by respiration of oxygen, whereas cancer cells meet their energy needs in great part by fermentation. All normal body cells are thus obligate aerobes, whereas all cancer cells are partial anaerobes. From the standpoint of the physics and chemistry of life this difference between normal and cancer cells is so great that one can scarcely picture a greater difference. Oxygen gas, the donor of energy in plants and animals is dethroned in the cancer cells and replaced by an energy yielding reaction of the lowest living forms, namely, a fermentation of glucose.
If one then brings such cells, in which during their growth under reduced oxygen pressure a cancer cell metabolism has been produced, back under the original high oxygen pressure, and allows the cell to grow further, the cancer metabolism remains. The transformation of embryonic cell metabolism into cancer cell metabolism can thus be irreversible, and important result, since the origin of cancer cells from normal body cells is an irreversible process. Furthermore, the very unexpected and fundamental fact, that tissue culture is carcinogenic and that a too low oxygen pressure is the intrinsic cause were discovered in the years 1927 to 1966. Anaerobiosis of cancer cells was an established fact only since 1960 when methods were developed to measure the oxygen pressure inside of tumors in the living body.
Life without oxygen in a living world that has been created by oxygen was so unexpected that it would have been too much to ask that anaerobiosis of cancer cells should be accepted at once by all scientists. But most of the resistance disappeared when at Lindau it was explained that based on anaerobiosis there is now a real chance to get rid of this terrible disease, if man is willing to submit to experiments and facts. It is true that more than 40 years were necessary to learn how to do it. But 40 years is a short time in the history of science.
Why then does it happen that despite all this, so little is done towards the prevention of cancer? The answer has always been that one does not know what cancer or the prime cause of cancer [might] be, and that one cannot prevent something that is not known.
But nobody today can say that one does not know what cancer and its prime cause [may] be. On the contrary, there is no disease whose prime cause is better known, so that today ignorance is no longer an excuse that one cannot do more about prevention.
To summarize what we just read the initial discovery was made in 1927 and accepted as fact in 1960. The primary cause of cancer is a reduction in cell respiration. FACT, all cancer breast, lung, liver, brain is all simply a collection of cells that are partial Anaerobes, they are different cells, lung cells or brain cells etc. but they are all partial anaerobes which are now called cancer cells. At this point in history 1966 the only thing they didn’t know was that the effect could be reversed, which is the science behind Sodium dichloroacetate DCA (NaDCA).
Just because researchers ignored Warburg’s discovery until 2007, it doesn’t mean the cancer industry didn’t figure out how to make money from it! The PET/CT scan machine “used to identify cancer and create a 3D image” was first developed in 1970 and generated over $15 Billion Dollars last year alone, it’s use in Oncology is solely based on The Warburg Effect! Does the PET scan work? sure it does, therefore the Warburg effect is fact!
What this all means is that any cancer is simply a group of cells that are partial anaerobes. Ask your Doctor what he/she knows about the Warburg effect or the prime cause of cancer? You may be shocked at the answer! So to sum it up in 1966 they were able to cause cancer in the lab by simply reducing the oxygen supply to a cell, the problem as you now know was that at this point in time they believed that this condition was irreversible, that is until the discovery in 2007 at the University of Alberta. The problem for the cancer industry is that if Sodium dichloroacetate DCA (NaDCA) worked in Humans the way it worked in the lab it would not only be a treatment for one type of cancer, but it would work on all types of cancer. Does it work in humans? Yes! please keep reading…
The cancer industry is a 500-billion-dollar business! With more lobbyists than any other industry and would appear to have a say over the funding of all cancer research including the cancer charities. How did this happen and what lengths would they go to too protect that? Is a nontoxic effective cancer treatment being suppressed? Would the lack of funding be considered evidence of suppression? We think that a reasonably intelligent person would expect at least something from the charities!
What if the Canadian Cancer Society funded a study using DCA to treat colorectal cancer at a different University and they used a protocol designed to discredit DCA? This research paper was published in Cancer cell in April of 2010. That would be almost impossible to believe, right! What evidence would you need to believe that the test was intentionally done in such a way that DCA would not be effective?
How about this; the University of Leeds in the UK was almost simultaneously doing a study on DCA as a treatment for colorectal cancer using a proper protocol and achieved great results. That study was published in the British Journal of Cancer in May 2010. I am sure the Canadian Cancer Society or the researcher had no idea that the same study was going on in the UK but surely, they are aware now, that was 2 years ago. You can find that study here (read more).
It would be reasonable to believe the CCS knows about the results of the University of Leeds study as it is now in the public domain, then why would the Canadian Cancer Society pay for google ads that show up every time a person searches Sodium dichloroacetate DCA (NaDCA). The ad links you to their page referencing this flawed study that discredits DCA? Does that make sense? Why promote a study knowing it is flawed? Could it be to use their presumed credibility to simply confuse people that don’t want to spend the time doing the research?
We think a cancer society that collects millions of dollars a year on the premise that they “will eradicate cancer in our lifetime” has a responsibility to investigate all potential cures, especially discoveries in large Universities. If they are going to only fund patented treatments that make their friends at the drug companies’ money, tell people that before they take our money. To spend donated money to attempt to discredit a viable nontoxic cure is reprehensible, period. If these actions or lack of actions upset you, think about the fact three million people have died in North America alone since this discovery.
We don’t mention all this because we think it will change the corruptness of the system, we mention it because our curiosity was peaked by the above evidence, driving us to uncover the rest of the of the story. We hope we have sparked up your curiosity and opened your mind up enough to continue reading. If you don’t have the time now, please bookmark this site and come back when you can.
Dr. Epstein describes in this quote is exactly what is happening to Sodium dichloroacetate DCA (NaDCA) as it is not a patentable compound. It is incredibly important that people understand what cancer really is (Warburg effect) and the brilliant discovery by the Sodium dichloroacetate DCA (NaDCA) Team at the University of Alberta.
“That the NCI (National Cancer Institute), with enthusiastic support from the ACS (American Cancer Society)_ the tail that wags the NCI dog _ has effectively blocked funding for research and clinical trials
on promising non-toxic alternative cancer drugs for decades, in favor of highly toxic and largely ineffective patented drugs developed by the multi-billion-dollar global cancer drug industry. Additionally, the cancer establishment has systematically harassed the proponents of non-toxic alternative cancer drugs” Samuel S. Epstein, M.D.
Samuel S. Epstein, M.D. is professor emeritus of Environmental and Occupational Medicine at the University of Illinois School of Public Health, and Chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition.
We have gathered information that is already in the public domain. It is not our intention to provide medical advice however it is hard not to share our opinions. It is up to the reader to decide if any of the matters to which we refer might be suitable for them. The discovery by the DCA team at the University of Alberta is the most significant cancer research breakthrough in 90 years! Was it not for the fact that no one was supposed to be working on a cure for cancer, especially not a non patentable one, they would have won a Nobel prize!
It does not take a scientist; to either understand why Sodium dichloroacetate DCA (NaDCA) works or the reasons why it is being held back. We have found numerous published studies of Sodium dichloroacetate DCA (NaDCA) in various well know medical journals. These studies evidence over 60 years of research testing DCA with great results for many health issues. If you are a medical professional and find something to be not accurate please leave a comment to bring it to our attention, it is our intent to expose the truth and not mislead anyone.
If you take the time to educate yourself about this remarkable discovery you will then understand the reason and who is behind the cover-up and misinformation taking place regarding Sodium dichloroacetate DCA’s (NaDCA) effectiveness and safety.
Is it safe? YES! Some human clinical trials using Sodium dichloroacetate DCA (NaDCA) have gone on for more then 5 years with no adverse effects. The Lead researcher at The University of Alberta describes DCA as a small molecule like vinegar.
A lot of the information currently available on the Internet is dated from 2007, prior to any human use for cancer, and in most cases inaccurate. Those reporting on NaDCA are either Big Pharma biased/paid or simply inept at doing proper research before reporting an opinion, this includes the Cancer Charity websites! Even the definition in Wikipedia is fear mongering by the Pharma industry, and not well researched. It is common that Big Pharma uses the media and so called science blogs and Cancer Charities to put out misinformation (read more). Look at social media, some how they have gained control of all disease and disease related hash tags and are able to sensor what is posted.
This is not just our opinion, any negative information you find online regarding Sodium dichloroacetate DCA (NaDCA) is easily disproved by the published medical journal studies and articles available on this site. The cancer industry counts on people not taking the time to do the research. Please take the time to read the medical journals, it is the only way to understand for yourself what the truth is.
Bottom line is they don’t want you to take it and they don’t want it clinically trialed. They have two main objectives; one is convincing people that DCA is dangerous to take on your own- But how can that be when published studies lasting over 5 years showed it is as safe as taking aspirin. The industries second point is that DCA is unproven by their standards and will require huge clinical trials involving thousands of patients and will cost $100’s of millions of dollars, yet…
We have found Cancer drugs that have been approved in months after being trialed on only 96 people, only 43% had a regression in tumor size! (read more). Of course, this drug will cost $75,000 wholesale for a full course of treatment. You will see that the University of Alberta’s small human trial achieved 100% response in tumor reduction, every patient! Yet they say the sampling was not large enough to conclude DCA works, Really!
Simply put, Sodium dichloroacetate DCA (NaDCA) works by turning off the cancer cells immortality and allowing it to kill itself with no side effects or damage to healthy cells. Current “orthodox” Cancer Treatments don’t work, that you will see is also published in the medical journals, they just don’t report it in the mainstream media (see PDF). If you are currently undergoing or have recently had orthodox treatments you may want to just bookmark the site and come back at another time, as some people have been offended or upset by some of the information further down the page.
Please before you leave read Otto Warburg’s lecture “prime cause and prevention” and add the respiratory enzymes to your diet. You might also consider DCA as a supplement to avoid recurrence. with a recurrence rate of 90% following orthodox treatment DCA could clean up any metastasis caused by the treatment. New studies just out are showing that these treatments themselves can cause metastasis. see here
If you are waiting for the evening news to tell you the prime cause of cancer was a proven fact 52 years ago, you are going to wait a long time. Because the same people controlling the Drug Trust also have control over the mainstream media (read more). Freedom of the press does not include reporting stories that prove your major advertisers’ product may do more harm than good.
When researching DCA you need to understand that the cancer industry is trying to downplay and discredit DCA’s effectiveness, while also twisting the statistics (read more) they make you and your Doctor think that they are achieving success in the fight against cancer, when they really are not.
The truth is the death rate from cancer, an indicator that many health experts consider a more accurate measure of progress in fighting the disease, has stayed virtually the same for decades at about 200 deaths per 100,000 people a year, and about 1,000 deaths annually per 100,000 people over 65. Go see if you can figure out how the cancer charities arrive at there optimistic numbers; hope you have an advanced math degree.
Cancer is not a devastating disease or one to be afraid of, it is a degenerative disease that we can have for years or decades, the only thing to fear is the currently prescribed treatment do not get rushed into it. PLEASE DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH!
Please take some time to go through this information. We have broken the site up into sections, however it is easier to understand if you just continue to scroll down this page and absorb the information in the proper order.
We are not doctors; we have simply become convinced that the system is broken and so badly that millions of people are dying needlessly for the sake of Drug Company profits. The following is simple common sense, based on actual clinical studies of this amazing discovery. You will find that it conflicts greatly with what we are being told by a system we can no longer trust to look out for our best interests.
The current health care system was set up and is controlled by the pharmaceutical industry and is structured in such a way that their financial interests are protected to the highest levels of government and the charities we support. We have a video further down the page that explains how this happened.
Remember this discovery was made at a large University that knows how an un-patented drug can be ignored by the industry; See Dr. Michelakis’s 2001 and 2004 DCA papers on right hand side bar. There has been criticism of the press conference and claims that were made by the DCA team. However, they had to be up front about their concerns. The lack of funding over the past 5 years is proof they were right.
This comment is from the husband of the person in the University of Alberta clinical trial that had not had standard treatment. You must wonder why she was not mentioned!
Dustin on September 14, 2010 7:52 PM writes…
I’ve been doing a lot of reading about DCA and the possible benefits on brain tumors and I can tell you all this…..my wife was diagnosed with a tumor on her cerebellum and because we are lucky enough to be living in Alberta AND because she met all the requirements, she was included in the U of A trials. With that said, she had NO surgery and NO chemo or radiation….she was only given DCA and some vitamins and after two months her scan revealed that it shrunk by 20% and two weeks later it revealed that that little piece of hell in her head was stopped in its tracks! She is too continuing this treatment until November and than we will see what’s next….
This is a major Canadian University! There is no way this could be kept from the public, after all cancer kills 20,000 people a day worldwide and 1,600 people a day in North America!! That means over 3 million people in North America have died since this discovery was made. Three million mothers, fathers, brothers and sisters.
This was posted by a researcher at McMaster University.
Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is a notoriously aggressive form of cancer. Its prognosis remains poor and little advancement in treatment strategy has emerged in the last decade. However, the recent report of clinical trials conducted by the group of Evangelos Michelakis (1) gives hope to GBM sufferers. With this publication, it is hoped that the use of dichloroacetate (DCA) will gain wider acceptance in the oncology community. Recently, oncologists treating GBM in Canada, where this idea and story were developed, have been all too dismissive of this therapy. A great deal of this skepticism found in Eastern Ontario, and especially Toronto, is likely due to the unfortunate circumstance of a local private practice “Medicore Cancer Centre” using off-label DCA in the treatment of a wide range of cancers, which has convinced medical oncologists that treating GBM with DCA is unfounded and dangerous. Thus, treatment strategies involving DCA were unfortunately rapidly discredited, even though Michelakis’ group had previously published sound scientific evidence regarding the effectiveness of DCA in GBM cell lines and animal models in a top tier basic science journal (2). It is hoped that following the publication of this recent article, the oncology community in Toronto, which remains highly respected and has a reputation for great competence in its field, will re-evaluate the (combined) use of DCA in the treatment
of GBM. [References: (1) Michelakis et al. 2010. Science Translational Medicine. (2) Bonnet et al. 2007. Cancer Cell.]
It seems that some other much respected cancer researchers are also listening. This is a short video from ecancer.tv of an interview of Dr, Tak Mak during the American Association of Cancer Researchers 2011 conference in Orlando. What he is basically saying is that current cancer research is wrong, that the cure is in the metabolism of cancer which is the commonality of all cancers…The WARBURG EFFECT.
See Dr, Tak Mak’s bio here: Tak Wah Mak, OCOOntFRSFRSC (Chinese: 麥德; pinyin: Mài Déhuá; born October 4, 1946 in China) is a Canadian medical researcher, geneticist, oncologist, and biochemist. He first became widely known for his discovery of the T-cell receptor in 1983 and pioneering work in the genetics of immunology. In 1995, Mak published a landmark paper on the discovery of the function of the immune checkpoint protein CTLA-4, thus opening the path for immunotherapy/checkpoint inhibitors as a means of cancer treatment. Mak is also the founder of Agios Pharmaceuticals, whose lead compound, IDHIFA®, was approved by the FDA for acute myeloid leukemia in August 2017, becoming the first drug specifically targeting cancer metabolism to be used for cancer treatment. He has worked in a variety of areas including biochemistry, immunology, and cancer genetics. His ground-breaking work on the T-cell receptor has been postulated to be in consideration for a Nobel Prize.
The Warburg Effect was the biggest breakthrough in cancer research until the University of Alberta discovery; it came over 80 years ago but was ignored by the cancer research industry until now! Or was it? The answer is NO. It was pursued by a small research institute in Germany called the Dehlem Institute, which was set up by the Rockefeller foundation in 1930 to pursue Warburg’s discovery. The importance of the Rockefeller connection and their control of the Drug Trust (read more) are immense, and discussed later on this page.
The following is the 2007 press release from the DCA team at the University, please note it refers to DCA as a molecule or compound not as a drug, it is not a drug. It is a compound like sodium bicarbonate is. We will refer to DCA or NaDCA throughout the site as it is the salts of Dichloroacetic acid NaDCA is the actual compound you would take orally.
The University of Alberta Discovery
March 15, 2007
DCA is an odourless, colourless, inexpensive, relatively non-toxic, small molecule. And researchers at the University of Alberta believe it may soon be used as an effective treatment for many forms of cancer.
Dr. Evangelos Michelakis, a professor at the U of a Department of Medicine, has shown that dichloroacetate (DCA) causes regression in several cancers, including lung, breast, and brain tumors.
Michelakis and his colleagues, including post-doctoral fellow Dr. Sebastien Bonnet, have published the results of their research in the journal Cancer Cell.
Scientists and doctors have used DCA for decades to treat children with inborn errors of metabolism due to mitochondrial diseases. Mitochondria, the energy producing units in cells, have related to cancer since the 1930s, when researchers first noticed that these organelles dysfunction when cancer is present.
Until recently, researchers believed that cancer-affected mitochondria are permanently damaged and that this damage is the result, not the cause, of the cancer. But Michelakis, a cardiologist, questioned this belief and began testing DCA, which activates a critical mitochondrial enzyme, to “revive” cancer-affected mitochondria.
The results astounded him.
Michelakis and his colleagues found that DCA normalized the mitochondrial function in many cancers, showing that their function was actively suppressed by the cancer but was not permanently damaged by it.
More importantly, they found that the normalization of mitochondrial function resulted in a significant decrease in tumor growth both in test tubes and in animal models. Also, they noted that DCA, unlike most currently used chemo therapies, did not have any effects on normal, non-cancerous tissues.
“I think DCA can be selective for cancer because it attacks a fundamental process in cancer development that is unique to cancer cells,” Michelakis said. “One of the really exciting things about this compound is that it might be able to treat many different forms of cancer”.
Another encouraging thing about DCA is that, being so small, it is easily absorbed in the body, and, after oral intake, it can reach areas in the body that other drugs cannot, making it possible to treat brain cancers, for example.
Also, because DCA has been used in both healthy people and sick patients with mitochondrial diseases, researchers already know that it is a relatively non-toxic molecule that can be immediately tested on patients with cancer.
“The results are intriguing because they point to the critical role that mitochondria play, they impart a unique trait to cancer cells that can be exploited for cancer therapy” Dario Alteri Director University of Massachusetts Cancer Center
Investing in Research
The DCA compound is not patented and not owned by any pharmaceutical company, and, therefore, would likely be an inexpensive drug to administer, says Michelakis, the Canada Research Chair in Pulmonary Hypertension and Director of the Pulmonary Hypertension Program with Capital Health, one of Canada’s largest health authorities.
However, as DCA is not patented, Michelakis is concerned that it may be difficult to find funding from private investors to test DCA in clinical trials. He is grateful for the support he has already received from publicly funded agencies, such as the Canadian Institutes for Health Research (CIHR), and he is hopeful such support will continue and allow him to conduct clinical trials of DCA on cancer patients. Michelakis’ research is currently funded by the CIHR, the Canada Foundation for Innovation, the Canada Research Chairs program, and the Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research.
“This preliminary research is encouraging and offers hope to thousands of Canadians and all others around the world who are afflicted by cancer, as it accelerates our understanding of and action around targeted cancer treatments,” said Dr. Philip Branton, Scientific Director of the CIHR Institute of Cancer.
DCA and Cancer Patients
The University of Alberta DCA Research Team is set to launch clinical trials on humans in the spring of 2007 pending government approval. Knowing that thousands of cancer patients die weekly while waiting for a cure, Dr. Michelakis and his team are working at accelerated speed, condensing research that usually takes years into months. Fundraisers at the University of Alberta are determined to raise the money to allow this next phase of research to begin. Once Health Canada grants formal approval, the University of Alberta’s Research Team will begin testing DCA on patients living with cancer. Results with regards to the safety and efficacy of treatment should be known late this year.
“If there were a magic bullet, though, it might be something like dichloroacetate or DCA…” Newsweek, January 23, 2007
Why no funding for Sodium dichloroacetate DCA (NaDCA)?
The University of Alberta was only able to raise $1,500,000 from private individuals around the world and a small amount from the Alberta Government, There was no further funding from “The Canadian Institute for Health Research”, or The Canada Foundation for Innovation, two of the agencies that funded the original discovery! Also, NO money from the Canadian or American Cancer Societies, or any of the other national funding agencies for cancer research in either country, even though these agencies fund billions of dollars in drug company research and clinical trials every year.
Big Pharma has positioned themselves and their doctors as experts in the field of cancer treatment gaining seats on the boards or advisory panels of all the government agencies, and the Cancer Charities we all support. This would be like putting Oil Company executives on the boards of government agencies and non-profits funding research into alternative fuel sources. Truth is we could not come up with one disease modern Medicine has cured ever! If you know of one leave it in the comment box at the bottom of the page. Vaccines don’t count and are surrounded by controversy as to their effectiveness verses the harm they can do. Penicillin came from a moldy cantaloupe almost 70 years ago and Insulin was also discovered at a Canadian University in 1921.
Although NaDCA was identified in the lab being effective for breast cancer there was no money from the Canadian Breast Cancer Society, The Canadian Breast Cancer Foundation or the Susan G. Komen for the Cure; even though collectively they take in over $600 million dollars a year. Susan G Komen for the cure did however spend $1,000,000 suing other cancer charities for using their pretty pink ribbon symbol. They also have a cash reserve of close to a billion dollars.
The Charities are more focused on early detection; for which they have no reasonable treatment. They also promote drugs that claim to reduce the chance of recurrence of breast cancer, like Tamoxifen STAY AWAY FROM THESE DRUGS as they are carcinogenic and offer negligible if any benefit. See here how they confuse the public with relative or absolute percentages of success (read more).
Confused? Follow the Money! Which drug company sponsors the Cancer Societies Breast Cancer Awareness month (read more)? Astrazenica the sole manufacturer of Tamoxifen.
Health Canada issued a bulletin to all cancer Doctors in 2002 that stated the following:
“Health Canada would like to draw your attention to a recent publication identifying important safety information on the
use of tamoxifen and the incidence of uterine malignancies, stroke and pulmonary embolism…It is emphasized that the use of tamoxifen in the prevention setting is not an approved indication in Canada” (read more).
No funding for NaDCA equals limited and delayed clinical trials, which means the cure simply gets buried, “the law says a drug can’t be used, if it is unproven”. If it is unproven, they call it quackery. Yet there is no proof that Chemotherapy works! In fact, there are many published studies in medical journals that Chemo and radiation do not work! In fact, your doctor can not look you in the eye and tell you the $100,000 course of treatment he is prescribing for you will work…Chemotherapy is quite possibly the biggest scam ever perpetrated on Humanity
How stupid does the Pharmaceutical industry think we are, for more then 60 years they told people they are terminally ill and sold them and I mean sold them on the idea of burning the cancer out of them with radiation or injecting caustic radioactive substances in our veins? It is insane that people are still given these treatments, yet none are proven successful and the treatment in many cases sadly eventually kills the patient? More patients DIE of the TREATMENT then the disease (read more)!
What is Sodium dichloroacetate DCA (NaDCA)
Most of us will know that sodium chloride is salt, and that acetic acid is vinegar, so Sodium Dichloroacetate is basically salt and vinegar with one extra chlorine atom attached. What is in my mind criminal is that in 2007 the food and drug agencies in Canada the USA and Europe put sodium dichloroacetate on a restricted list for
manufacture and importation. Chemical companies in North America can only sell it to licensed labs for clinical trials. Find out how to get it here.
This simple chemical compound could qualify under current laws as a daily supplement that could be taken safely by anyone healthy or sick, and it is my opinion that those of us that did so would never get sick. This is supported by the many human and lab trials that have been carried out over the last 60 years. As we have said the intent of Big Pharma will be to have people fearful of using it on their own by misinformation. This is easy as health Canada or the FDA as the protection Racket for Big Pharma simply advise people of false dangers and Big Pharma does the same through the science blogs and Cancer Charities (read more). Although the initial discovery was broadcast by all Canadian national news media, and CNN and MSNBC (it caught their upper management off guard), it was the only TV coverage the DCA team received until 2010. The results of the clinical trials were published on YouTube by the university and covered with a negative spin by some print media.
This is part of a 2010 press release by the University
DCA is an inexpensive drug that contains dichloroacetic acid, a very small, simple molecule that resembles vinegar. It is mostly used to treat children with a rare metabolic disorder. In 2007, Michelakis and his team published evidence that DCA reverses cancer growth in non-human models by altering the metabolism of the cancer. The drug tricks cancer cells into normal energy production by changing the way they handle nutrient fuels. This causes the cancer cells to “commit suicide,” without harming healthy cells.
Many researchers around the world have confirmed the University of Alberta team’s 2007 findings.Often research that was promising in non-human models does not work outside the lab. However, the U of A team is now reporting success in the next phase of its DCA research, testing the DCA compound in humans. After extracting glioblastomas from 49 patients over a two-year period and studying them within minutes of removal in the operating room, the team verified that the tumors responded to DCA by changing their metabolism
Comment: So, the University describes Sodium dichloroacetate DCA (NaDCA) as a small little molecule that resembles vinegar and we are not allowed to buy it? The full 2010 press release is coming up below but is heavily censored. The point here is that it worked in humans the same as in the lab.
The Conspiracy It was said in 2007 that Big Pharma would not block NaDCA just because it would not
make them any money and Big Pharma biased science bloggers laughed at the conspiracy theory. So, after 5 years, the lack of funding from Government or the Cancer societies and with a laughable but successful clinical trial I don’t see that anyone would call it a theory. It is easy to see that funding is being blocked…It is estimated that an early diagnosed cancer patient from diagnosis to death can be worth $350,000 or more to the Cancer industry, of course they will block it.
Sodium dichloroacetate DCA (NaDCA) available online would cost $2-$3 per day. Oh, and by the way the American Cancer Society warns you that these sellers are out to fleece desperate people of their money. But $85,000 of Chemo may give a person an additional 3 months. I wonder who is really preying on the desperate people??
But what about all the lives you ask?
It is all about the money, loss and suffering of innocent lives is a casualty of the industry! The trusted Journal of the American Medical Association published a study in 1998 that; prescription drugs taken as prescribed in hospitals are the fourth leading cause of death in the U.S and Canada, after cancer, heart disease and strokes. They cause about 10,000 deaths a year in Canada and about 106,000 deaths a year and over two million.
serious injuries in the U.S. (Source: Lazarou et al JAMA Vol. 279 No. 15 pp.1200-1205 Incidence of Adverse Drug Reactions in Hospitalized Patients).
This number of people poisoned to death is equivalent to 2 large passenger jets falling out of the sky and crashing every day of the year. How many days would this go on before somebody questioned if something was wrong with the aviation industry? These victims’ families or insurance companies are still required to pay for the dead patients stay in the hospital! What a business!
As many as another 10,000 deaths a year in Canada are thought to occur outside hospitals due to the wrong drug, dosage errors, and adverse reactions. (Source: Dr. Joel Lexchin, Associate Professor, School of Health Policy and Management, York University, Emergency Physician, University Health Network, and Associate Professor, Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont.)
I would assume the doubling holds true in the USA also. Now that is 4 large passenger jets a day falling from the sky anyone notice yet? Now it is estimated that less than 5% of Hospital errors are ever reported. In Ontario, Canada under the current “Coroners Act” all prescription and over the counter drug deaths are identified as “natural” (read more). You would have to wonder what the real number of Drug deaths really are?
What happened to the quick clinical trails talked about in the 2007 press release? This is the press conference at the U of A in May of 2010. Keep in mind the DCA Team has been heavily censored on what they can say. Whether threatened with no funding for future studies or simply as they have done in the past a smear campaign to end careers, I can’t say but Dr. Michelakis does make his points on the effectiveness of NaDCA. Good for him!
We all have been led to believe that cancer is a complicated disease, and therefore a death sentence! IT IS NOT! The primary cause of ALL cancer was known in the early 1960’s.The University of Alberta team proved that Sodium dichloroacetate DCA (NaDCA) could reverse the Warburg effect. Unfortunately for us what they also proved was that all the billions of dollars being spent at the time on research and for most of the last 85 years was useless based on this discovery. Funny as it may seem the useless research has continued to be funded by billions of dollars per year, yet the U of A could not get funding.
It also looks like any funding going to trials for NaDCA, will be testing NaDCA as a supplement to standard therapy. Some of those studies are already beginning to be published. They claim they will use Sodium dichloroacetate DCA (NaDCA) to reduce the size of the tumor so it can be easier for the Radiation or Chemo to work. This is insane, if they would just continue to use the NaDCA in treating the cancer it would disappear. They know that, however, so as not to lose money they will insist on poisoning you so that you will always be a patient. They DO NOT WANT NaDCA CLINICALLY TRIALLED ON ITS OWN.
You will find comments online that NaDCA in some patients will shrink a tumor to a certain point and then stop working; the reality is that NaDCA would only stop working if the cancer cells were gone. It is my belief that what is left is a benign tumor, as it is not uncommon for cancerous tumors to start in the low oxygen environment of a benign tumor. The people reporting that their tumor stopped shrinking have also all reported feeling well. Why would the Canadian Government not contribute money? In the 2007 Federal budget 300 million dollars was set aside to fund the controversial human papilloma vaccine. Huge payday for Big Pharma!
As I mentioned earlier as experts in the Cancer industry, their representatives hold key positions on all the funding agencies and are also the largest lobby group. Vaccines are a huge business for the Pharma industry, as in a lot of cases they can get them made mandatory by governments, billions have been wasted on viruses that never materialize H1N1 and swine flu come to mind, why was, NaDCA only tested on 5 patients? This is partly to do with the lack of funding; however, it is possible that for the clinical trial to proceed, these were the stipulated conditions required for approval by Health Canada. Just the fact that it was trialed on Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) one of the most aggressive brain cancers, with a life expectancy of 9-11 months from diagnosis, indicates Health Canada wanted the trial to fail. The goal of the industry is to not look like they are hampering but at the same time restrict studies to keep the product from public use.
As I said earlier, if we ever do get to use NaDCA from a doctor it will most likely be in conjunction with the cancer industry poisons. However, there is great news here if you paid attention to what Dr. Michelakis said “NaDCA did work in Humans exactly the way it was supposed to.” The study only had one patient that had not had chemo, radiation
and surgery all of which do irreparable damage. That one person had complete remission including the stem cells. Dr. Michelakis did test NaDCA on the 49 biopsies which proved conclusively that NaDCA works and it worked on all 49 biopsies. The more time you spend on this site the more you will understand why Dr. Michelakis, had to be careful in what he said (PDF of clinical trial can be found here).
Sabotaging the CURE
The Cancer industry can keep DCA away from the public by keeping the funding away from the clinical trials. It doesn’t stop there; the government agencies and charities also have a history of sabotaging products that work but don’t benefit their Big Pharma friends. “In the past when the NCI [National Cancer Institute] or its assigned entity conducted an alternative cancer therapy [clinical trial] they always altered the protocols and let it fail in order to discredit the therapy. But this time the pharmacokinetic data shows that they didn’t do it right. Most scientists will not look at it carefully because “papa is telling you something and you don’t question him”. Li-Chuan Chen, PhD, National Cancer Institute scientist 1991 – 1997, commenting on the NCI’s publishing scientifically invalid Antineoplastons trials in the peer-reviewed medical literature “Mayo Clinic Proceedings” in February 1999 showing that the patients unsuccessfully treated with Antineoplastons had actually received severely diluted (up to close to 170 times lower than necessary) Antineoplaston concentrations and were thus left to die.
Possibly why the Canadian Cancer Society funded a study on colorectal cancer that was designed specifically to discredit the benefits of DCA? As we said they now pay for a google ad promoting this flawed study they funded.
A University of Guelph study has found that a prescription drug thought to have anti-cancer properties when used off-label may not only be less effective than claimed but may protect some kinds of cancers.
This research was funded by the Canadian Cancer Society’s Research Institute.
The study was done in such a way that Sodium dichloroacetate DCA (NaDCA) would not work and the researcher at the University of Guelph should be ashamed of herself as she was used. We would love to hear what she has to say about it. However their PR department at the university would not respond to our questions (read more).
Fortunately for us, what neither the Canadian Cancer society nor the U of Guelph researcher were aware of at the time was that the University of Leeds in the UK was also doing a study on Nadcap’s effectiveness on colorectal cancer. The following is the conclusion from that study (read more). Results: Dichloroacetate (20 mM) did not reduce growth of non-cancerous cells but caused significant decrease in
cancer cell proliferation (P=0.009), which was associated with apoptosis and G2 phase cell-cycle arrest.
Pyruvate dehydrogenase kinase inhibition attenuates glycolysis and facilitates mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation, leading to reduced growth of colorectal cancer cells but not of non-cancerous cells. Studies will continue to be funded and published discrediting NaDCA, when you come upon a negative study look to see where the funding for that study came from and read the comment stream!
“That the NCI, with enthusiastic support from the ACS _ the tail that wags the NCI dog _ has effectively blocked funding for research and clinical trials on promising non-toxic alternative cancer drugs for decades, in favor of highly toxic and largely ineffective patented drugs developed by the multibillion dollar global cancer drug industry. Additionally, the cancer establishment has systematically harassed the proponents of non-toxic alternative cancer drugs” Samuel S. Epstein, M.D
Samuel S. Epstein, M.D. is professor emeritus of Environmental and Occupational Medicine at the University of Illinois School of Public Health, and Chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition. See Dr. Epstein’s biography here: http://www.preventcancer.com/about/epstein.htm#bio
Chemo doesn’t work
Why does chemotherapy and radiation continue to be used when it is a known carcinogen and has been reported in the top medical journals as ineffective? Simple answer MONEY! The studies showing that Chemo does not work will never get reported in the mainstream media! The statistics that get reported are using relative statistics to make the outcome look much more positive. The only way to really know is by using absolute numbers as you will see below. Doesn’t look very good when analyzed this way does it!
The following table was published in the journal Clinical Oncology in December 2004. The results of this study were astonishing, showing that chemotherapy has an average 5-year survival success rate of just over 2 percent for ALL cancers! Double click the chart to enlarge. See full study here http://fiocco59.altervista.org/ALLEGATI/MORGAN.PDF
In the U.S., chemo was most successful in treating testicular cancer and Hodgkin’s disease, where its success rate fell just below 38 percent and slightly over 40 percent respectively. Still well below the 50/50 mark.
A review of chemo on 5-year survival rates in Australia garnered almost identical results, with a 2.3 percent success rate, compared to the U.S. 2.1 percent rate of success.
“A study of over 10,000 patients shows clearly that chemo’s supposedly strong track record with Hodgkin’s disease (lymphoma) is actually a lie. Patients who underwent chemo were 14 times more likely to develop leukemia and 6 times more likely to develop cancers of the bones, joints, and soft tissues than those patients who did not undergo chemotherapy (NCI Journal 87:10).”—John Diamond
Children who are successfully treated for Hodgkin’s disease are 18 times more likely later to develop secondary malignant tumours. Girls face a 35% chance of developing breast cancer by the time they are 40-which is 75 times greater than the average. The risk of leukemia increased markedly four years after the ending of successful treatment, and reached a plateau after 14 years, but the risk of developing solid tumours remained high and approached 30 per cent at 30 years (New Eng. J Med, March 21, 1996).
Shifting our thinking Sodium dichloroacetate DCA (NaDCA) is a nontoxic highly effective treatment for cancer! What if we said it may be as simple to treat cancer as a yeast infection, you probably wouldn’t believe it. Why? because we have always been told there is no cure! Think about it this way we have all been conditioned to believe that cancer is a catastrophic event in our life, however it is really the treatment that is catastrophic not the cancer. Imagine for a second the catastrophic effect of a simple infection prior to the discovery of penicillin in 1943. Infections killed millions of people. From that date forward infections were treated quickly. Diabetes was a death sentence prior to insulin which by the way was also discovered at a Canadian University in 1921 and was in mass production by 1923. A noble prize was awarded to the team in 1923.
The Legacy of Insulin
Banting, Macleod, and the rest of the team patented their insulin extract but gave away all their rights to the University of Toronto, which would later use the income from insulin to fund new research.
Very soon after the discovery of insulin, the medical firm Eli Lilly started large-scale production of the extract. As soon as 1923, the firm was producing enough insulin to supply the entire North American continent.
Although insulin doesn’t cure diabetes, it’s one of the biggest discoveries in medicine. When it came, it was like a miracle. People with severe diabetes and only days left to live were saved. And if they kept getting their insulin, they could live an almost normal life.
This cure for Cancer was discovered by a large Canadian University in 2007. However, I now believe as others do, that the cure was discovered in the 1960’s at the Dehlam Institute in Germany a research lab owned by the Rockefeller foundation, however as it wasn’t patentable it was kept hidden. To understand the Rockefeller connections please watch the video below. Was the cure that they discovered DCA? we can not connect the dots on that one but we can prove that DCA was being tested as a treatment for mitochondrial conditions in the 1960’s. Cancers immortality according to the Warburg effect is achieved by the shutting down of the mitochondria
We realized that the concept of a cheap simple cure requires a huge shift in most peoples thinking, and most people can’t believe that if there was such a miraculous solution that it would be suppressed. We have all been taught to respect our doctors, but what if they are also being fed misinformation. Every doctor I have talked to knew nothing about DCA. Ask your Oncologist to explain the Warburg Effect…think they can?
We have no delusion that this information made public will change the system and this site will undoubtedly be attacked by those that make their living from Human Suffering and fear mongering, however the facts are the facts and I challenge them to dispute the documents that come from their own publications. The facts being that NaDCA is safe for anyone to take sick or healthy, and if NaDCA cures one cancer it would cure them all! Why? Because all cancers have the same primary cause! We are working on a section that you can print off and take to your doctor.
Interested in how the Medical system became what it is today? You must go back to where Modern Medicine started. Back when we had a choice in our medical care.
Take a few minutes and watch this video to see how modern medicine started and how Big Pharma got control of the whole industry, including the Universities, the AMA, FDA, Health Canada, and seats on the board of every government agency that doles out money for research and also the charities that act as a fund raiser and protector for the drug trust.
“Everyone should know that most cancer research is largely a fraud, and that the major cancer research organizations are derelict in their duties to the people who support them.” – Linus Pauling, Ph.D., two-time Nobel Prize winner, in Outrage (magazine), Oct/Nov 1986.
More people die from the “orthodox” treatments Chemotherapy, Radiation therapy and surgery, than die from Cancer. There is no case were we should ever accept standard cancer treatment, in fact this is the only way we can affect change in this out of control Cancer Industry (read more)!
New studies are now being published showing popular chemotherapy drugs that attack that attack the blood supply of tumors cause metastases. This has long been thought and just now proven.
Statistics are bad but, are much worse. You see if during chemotherapy treatment the patient dies of liver or kidney failure, or the heart is destroyed by the Chemo which is common, then the patient is listed as dying of heart failure, or liver failure. You get the picture. Also, there is a trend away from standard treatment and as you have read no treatment at all gives 4 times the life expectancy.
Don’t forget the patient only needs to live 5 years from diagnosis to be cured according to the way they keep statistics in the industry (read more). Please don’t rush into standard treatment.
“The five-year cancer survival statistics of the American Cancer Society are very misleading. They now count things that are not cancer, and, because we are able to diagnose at an earlier stage of the disease, patients falsely appear to live longer. Our whole cancer research in the past 20 years has been a failure. More people over 30 are dying from cancer than ever before. More women with mild or benign diseases are being included in statistics and reported as being ‘cured’. When government officials point to survival figures and say they are winning the war against cancer they are using those survival rates improperly.“
(Dr J. Bailer, New England Journal of Medicine.)
See what else Dr. Bailer had to say about current treatments here.
Many surgeons abandoned the mastectomy, yet in the USA over 1,000 women per week are persuaded to part with their breast, underlying muscles and lymph nodes, but the scalpel spivs omit to tell the victims that the average survival period is around twelve years without the mutilation and three years with it. Prof. H.B. Jones, Dept of Medical Physics and Physiology, University of California, in an address to the American Cancer Society in 1975
The operation or biopsy has a good chance of spreading cancer cells and is completely unnecessary because there is a urine test that is as reliable as a biopsy and a blood test. (source: World Without Cancer)
Some Good News The truth is that Cancer is a “degenerative disease” and could be present for decades! Defined by Wikipedia a degenerative disease, is a disease in which the function or structure of the affected tissues or organs will progressively deteriorate over time, whether due to normal bodily wear or lifestyle choices such as exercise or eating habits. Cancer patients only die when the cancer metastasis’. Oddly enough the most common cause of cancer metastasis are the orthodox therapies promoted by the cancer industry, Biopsies, surgery, Chemo, Radiation and Mammograms.
If you live in North America, you have seen the amazing Drug Companies Ads. It should be no surprise to you then that they also employ these ad agencies and ghost writers to write glowing articles about sketchy drugs, and bad things about alternatives. Things like “DCA is poisonous and people shouldn’t take it” they then pay doctors and scientific bloggers to sign their name to it (read more).
“A solution to cancer would mean the termination of research programs, the obsolescence of skills, the end of dreams of personal glory, triumph over cancer would dry up contributions to self-perpetuating charities….It would mortally threaten the present clinical establishments by rendering obsolete the expensive surgical, radiological and chemotherapeutic treatments in which so much money, training and equipment is invested….The new therapy must be disbelieved, denied, discouraged and disallowed at all costs, regardless of actual testing results, and preferably without any testing at all.”
Robert Houston and Gary Null.
Standard treatments are worse than no treatment at all, in fact studies suggest that patients that opt out of standard treatment survive 4 times longer than patients receiving treatment!
Medical study shows untreated patients live up to 4 times longer than those who received conventional cancer therapy
“My studies have proved conclusively that cancer patients who refuse chemotherapy and radiation actually live up to FOUR TIMES LONGER THAN TREATED CASES…Beyond a shadow of a doubt, radical surgery on cancer does more harm than good…As for radiation treatment — most of the time it makes not the slightest difference whether the machine is turned on or not. …unfortunately, it seems to be only a question of time, usually, before the disease pops up again all over the body… Every cancer patient who keeps in excellent physical shape may have many good years left. The alternative is to squander those years as an invalid through radical medical intervention, which has zero chance of extending life. …It’s utter nonsense to claim that catching cancer symptoms early enough will increase the patient’s chances of survival… Furthermore, untreated breast cancer cases show a life expectancy four times longer than treated ones. ~ My wife and I have discussed what she would do if breast cancer was diagnosed in her. And we both agreed that she would do nothing as regards to treatment, except to keep as healthy as possible. I guarantee she would live longer!”
Dr. Hardin Jones, prominent cancer researcher & former physiology professor at the University of California Department of Medical Physics, who has been studying cancer for more than 23 years, travelling the world to collect data on the dreaded disease. Published in Transactions, New York Academy of Science, series 2, v.18, n.3, p. 322.
It can take many years, or even decades, for so-called ‘malignant’ tumors to form and become noticeable. Most people at the point of early medical detection have no symptoms at all and may never develop a tumor of the size that would affect their lives. The problem with early detection is that standard treatments are than prescribed that are admittedly cancerous and will quite often start the ball rolling for what they refer to as a recurrence throughout the person’s life. The chance of recurrence is about 90% after standard treatment.
Stanford University doctors compared the effects of chemotherapy to doing nothing in patients with slow-growing tumors of the lymph nodes. The patients whose treatment was deferred for years did just as well as patients who immediately received expensive unpleasant chemotherapy. Nineteen of the 83 (or 23%) experienced spontaneous remission lasting four months to six years. A review of the study in the New England Journal of Medicine concluded, “…deferring treatment … may allow for spontaneous regression of the disease.” “Cheating Fate,” Health, April 6, 1992
Methods of early cancer detection
Mammograms! Thank you to Dr Tim O’Shea for highlighting the following very important information on the practice of mammography:
“This is one topic where the line between advertising and scientific proof has become very blurred. As far back as 1976, the American Cancer Society itself and its government colleague the National Cancer Institute terminated the routine use of mammography for women under the age of 50 because of its “detrimental” (carcinogenic) effects. More recently, a large study done in Canada on found that women who had routine mammograms before the age of 50 also had increased death rates from breast cancer by 36%. (Miller) Lorraine Day notes the same findings in her video presentation “Cancer Doesn’t Scare Me Anymore.” The reader is directed to these sources and should perhaps consider the opinion of other sources than those selling the procedure, before deciding.
John McDougall MD has made a thorough review of pertinent literature on mammograms. He points out that the $5-13 billion per year generated by mammograms controls the information that women get. Fear and incomplete data are the tools commonly used to persuade women to get routine mammograms. What is clear is that mammography cannot prevent breast cancer or even the spread of breast cancer. By the time a tumor is large enough to be detected by mammography, it has been there if 12 years! It is therefore ridiculous to advertise mammography as “early detection.” (McDougall p 114)
The other unsupportable illusion is that mammograms prevent breast cancer, which they don’t. On the contrary, the painful compression of breast tissue during the procedure itself can increase the possibility of metastasis by as much as 80%! Dr. McDougall notes that a between 10 and 17% of the time, breast cancer is a self-limiting non-life-threatening type called ductal carcinoma in situ. This harmless cancer can be made active by the compressive force of routine mammography (McDougall, p105). Most extensive studies show no increased survival rate from routine screening mammograms. After reviewing all available literature in the world on the subject, noted researchers Drs. Wright and Mueller of the University of British Columbia recommended the withdrawal of public funding for mammography screening, because the “benefit achieved is marginal, and the harm caused is substantial.” (Lancet, 1 Jul 1995) The harm they’re referring to includes the constant worrying and emotional distress, as well as the tendency for unnecessary procedures and testing to be done based on results which have a false positive rate as high as 50%.” (New York Times, 14 Dec 1997)
Whilst the remit of this article does not extend to a full exploration of the physical harm being exacted by some diagnostic methods and drug treatments, or the corrupting influence that money is exerting over medicine and medical practice, let the reader be assured that conventional medicine has more than its fair share of attendant commercial pressures, and especially so in the world of cancer, as we shall later discover.
The only benefit of early detection today goes to the cancer industry as they get a patient that will require treatment longer then waiting for symptoms to surface in later stage cancers. This also means they can infect people with cancerous chemotherapy or radiation that will keep them coming back for years. Colonoscopies are recommended and seem to offer no health risk, however as you will find out this early detection may just be what puts your life on a never-ending needless roller coaster ride. Screening for cancer will always increase the number of cancer cases diagnosed, compared with the number of cancers found in people who seek medical attention only after symptoms
appear. That’s because screening detects many more cancers that do not progress, which falsely inflates the apparent benefit of a screening tests (a phenomenon that the survey authors describe as overdiagnosis).
Here’s what the European prostate cancer screening trial found: For every one prostate cancer death avoided in the PSA screened men, 48 men suffered severe complications from unnecessary treatment of a non-progressive cancer.
Following up trial participants for 15 or 20 years might show a greater mortality benefit in the screened group, conceded LeFevre, “but after 10 years, there was enough evidence of no benefit that men should at least know that. There are serious risks to starting this cascade of testing and treating prostate cancer”.
Men who receive a positive PSA test result are likely to receive biopsies, but approximately 80% of positive PSA test results are false positives, according to the task force’s report. Prostate biopsies can cause fever, infection, bleeding, pain, and transient urinary difficulty in some men. Nearly all men—90%—with PSA-detected prostate cancer will elect to have early treatment with surgery, radiation, or androgen deprivation therapy. Up to 5 in 1000 men will die within 1 month of prostate cancer surgery, and between 10 and 70 men will have serious complications. Urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction occur in at least 20% to 30% of 1000 men treated with radiotherapy or surgery, and bowel dysfunction is an adverse effect of radiotherapy.
Treatment for prostate cancer has been oversold and its harms minimized by urologists and prostate cancer survivors, said the ACS official Brawley. “The treatment seems to be very effective because the majority of people who get it never needed to be cured,” he said. He cited the preliminary results of the Prostate Cancer Intervention Versus Observation Trial (PIVOT), presented at the American Urological Association meeting in May, which found that men treated immediately with radical prostatectomy had no greater prostate cancer–specific or all-cause mortality benefit than those in the observation group.
“What all these studies show is that there is a substantial number of men—at least 50% and as high as 70%—with localized prostate cancer who, if never told they had the disease and were never treated for the disease, would grow old and die from something unrelated,” said Brawley. “In the group of men who need to be cured, we need better treatment. And I believe that progress has been hindered by 20 years of screening frenzy.”
There are numerous other early detection methods however the one I want to talk about is the PET scan as it clearly proves the Warburg effect and the principles behind why if DCA cures one type of cancer it cures ALL cancers.
The Warburg effect states that the difference between a normal cell and a cancer cell is simply that a cancer cell gets its energy from glucoses and a normal cell gets energy from oxygen, therefore fermentation is common to all cancer cells, although this was proven beyond a doubt in the early 1960’s the cancer industry in an effort to complicate cancer has been researching all the so called various types of cancer, as if lung cancer is different from breast cancer and also researching treatments for each cancer separately.
However, as a business the cancer industry knew that if they could get a patient earlier in the cancer cycle, they could treat the patient longer and make more money. The Warburg effect was used as the bases behind the PET scan, but not as a direction for research!
With a PET scan the patient is injected with a Glucose-based Radiopharmaceutical, the patient is then put into a PET/CT scanner which identifies the areas were the cancer cells are as they are feeding off the glucose, accurate 3D tumor images can then be seen on a computer screen. Interestingly no research was focused on this simple concept of cancer cell metabolism until the University of Alberta discovered that NaDCA could switch the mitochondria of a cancer cell back on allowing it to commit suicide. The PET scan was developed in the early 70’s.
If the PET scan works, then the Cancer Industry aggress with Warburg’s discovery; that all cancer is the same in the way it gets energy is true. Therefore, theoretically NaDCA is a cure for all cancers, it is that simple and is why the researchers made such a bold statement. Why was the U of A discovery made by a cardiologist? In 2001 and 2004 Dr. Michelakis and his team published two papers regarding the virtues of NaDCA in the treatment of heart patients and found that NaDCA would help re open previously clogged arteries, and NaDCA was shown to be helpful in head injury and stroke recovery.
This is the closing paragraph from one of these studies published in the American Heart Journal
DCA is a very attractive drug to be studied in human PHT, particularly because it has already been used in small, short-term human studies without major toxicity.13–15 To the best of our knowledge, no other drugs in current clinical use have Kv channel opening properties. DCA may be capable of restoring Kv channel function and expression and thus have benefit in the treatment of pulmonary vascular diseases.
Of coarse the industry paid no attention as NaDCA has no patent, also why the U of A wanted to make sure NaDCA got as much press as possible for its ability to shrink tumors, they knew that Big Pharma would hinder its trials every way it could.
Now just for laughs lets look at what the PET scan machine is used to diagnose, all types of Cancer, Heart disease such as coronary artery disease, both of which we now know NaDCA to be effective at treating. Also, and this is where it gets interesting; a PET scan is also used to detect Brain disorders such as Alzheimer disease, Parkinson’s disease, and epilepsy. Could NaDCA also be useful in the treatment of these brain disorders? Or simply by taking NaDCA as a supplement can these disorders be avoided or reversed? Sorry just had to throw that out there, as you will never see funding for trials of NaDCA for any of these diseases now, so let’s get back to what cancer is and the brilliance of Otto Warburg.
The primary cause of cancer
The biggest breakthrough in early detection is the PET scan machine; it is based on the Warburg effect which is also the bases for the DCA discovery and why such a simple molecule was the missing link in 1966 when Otto Warburg gave the following speech. The following is an excerpt. The complete paper is available here.
The Prime Cause and Prevention of Cancer
(Revised Lindau Lecture)
By OTTO WARBURG Director, Max Planck Institute for Cell Physiology, Berlin-Dahlem, Germany) English Edition by DEAN BURK, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland.
Note by DEAN BURK: Adapted from a lecture originally delivered by O. Warburg at the 1966 annual meeting of Nobelists in Lindau, Germany. O. Warburg won the Nobel Prize in Medicine in 1931 for his discovery of the oxygen-transferring enzyme of cell respiration and was voted a second Nobel Prize in 1944 for his discovery of the active groups of the hydrogen transferring enzymes. Many universities, like
Harvard, Oxford, Heidelberg has offered him honorary degrees. He is a Foreign member of the Royal Society of London, a Knight of the Order of Merit founded by Frederick the Great and was awarded the Great Cross with Star and Shoulder ribbon of the Bundesrepublik. His main interests are Chemistry and Physics of Life. In both fields no scientists have been more successful. There are prime and secondary causes of diseases. For example, the prime cause of the plague is the plague bacillus, but secondary causes of the plague are filth, rats, and the fleas that transfer the plague bacillus from rats to man. By a prime cause of a disease I mean one that is found in every case of the disease.
Cancer, above all other diseases, has countless secondary causes. But, even for cancer, there is only one prime cause. Summarized in a few words, the prime cause of cancer is the replacement of the respiration of oxygen in normal body cells by a fermentation of sugar. All normal body cells meet their energy needs by respiration of oxygen, whereas cancer cells meet their energy needs in great part by fermentation. All normal body cells are thus obligate aerobes, whereas all cancer cells are partial anaerobes. From the standpoint of the physics and chemistry of life this difference between normal and cancer cells is so great that one can scarcely picture a greater difference. Oxygen gas, the donor of energy in plants and animals is dethroned in the cancer cells and replaced by an energy yielding reaction of the lowest living forms, namely, a fermentation of glucose.
The key to the cancer problem is accordingly the energetics of life, which has been the field of work of the Dahlem institute since its initiation by the Rockefeller Foundation about 1930. In Dahlem the oxygen transferring and hydrogen transferring enzymes were discovered and chemically isolated. In Dahlem the fermentation of cancer cells was discovered decades ago; but only in recent years has is been demonstrated that cancer cells can grow in the body almost with only the energy of fermentation. Only today can one submit, with respect to cancer, all the experiments demanded by PASTEUR and KOCH as proof of the prime causes of a disease. If it is true that the replacement of oxygen-respiration by fermentation is the prime cause of cancer, then all cancer cells without exception must ferment, and no normal growing cell ought to exist that ferments in the body.
Comment: Two things to note here, one is that all cancer cells are the same in the way they get energy from fermentation of sugar, therefore a rational approach to curing cancer would be to obstruct the cells access to sugar, if it can’t feed it can’t grow and can’t multiply and by cutting off the glucose and oxygenating the cell we now know thanks to the U of A, it will revert back to oxygen respiration and because the cell is bad it creates apoptosis (commits suicide). In simple terms that is exactly what NaDCA can do! The second thing to note here is that this work was carried on at the Rockefeller foundations Dahlem Institute. This would be like an oil company discovering that saltwater could replace gasoline and your car would run fine. If one puts embryonic mouse cells into a suitable culture medium saturated with physiological oxygen pressures, they will grow outside the mouse body, in vitro, and indeed as pure aerobes, with a pure oxygen respiration, without a trace of fermentation. However, if during the growth one provides and oxygen pressure so reduced that the oxygen respiration is partially inhibited, the purely aerobic metabolism of the mouse embryonic cells is quantitatively altered within 48 hours, in the course of two cell divisions, into the metabolism characteristic of fermenting cancer cells. Fig. 2 illustrates the very simple experimental procedure involved.
If one then brings such cells, in which during their growth under reduced oxygen pressure a cancer cell metabolism has been produced, back under the original high oxygen pressure, and allows the cell to grow further, the cancer metabolism remains. The transformation of embryonic cell metabolism into cancer cell metabolism can thus be irreversible, and important result, since the origin of cancer cells from normal body cells is an irreversible process. It is equally important that these body cells whose metabolism has thus been transformed into cancer metabolism now continue to grow in vitro as facultative anaerobes. The duration of our experiments is still too limited to have yielded results of tests of inoculation of such cells back into mice, but according to all previous indications such cells will later grow as anaerobes upon transplantation into animals.
In any case, these experiments belong to the most important experiments in the field of cancer investigation since the discovery of the fermentation of tumors. For cancer metabolism, heretofore, measured so many thousand of times, has now been induced artificially in body cells by the simplest conceivable experimental procedure, and with this artificially induced cancer metabolism the body cells divide and grow as anaerobes in vitro.
Comment: This was a simple experiment proving the primary cause of every cancer is a lack of oxygen in cell tissue. THEY ACTUALLY CAUSED CANCER CELLS by reducing the oxygen supply to normal cells. Keep in mind this is prior to 1966… Although they knew how to cause cancer now it was irreversible. It is my belief as well as others that the Rockefeller’s Dahlem Institute continued on to discover the cure for cancer in the late 60’s which was non patentable and therefore buried it.
Also realize that this transcript of Otto Warburg’s lecture was translated and published by Dean Burk who co-founded the US National Cancer Institute in 1937 and headed its Cytochemistry department for over three decades. Burk left NCI in 1974 claiming they had falsified testing on a natural cancer treatment Laetrile and the FDA was blocking what many considered the foremost treatment for cancer at the time. SOUND FAMILIAR?
Otto Warburg closed his address to his fellow Nobel-Laureates on June 30,1966 as follows: Many experts agree that one could prevent about 80% of all cancers in man, if one could keep away the known carcinogens from the normal body cells. This prevention of cancer might involve no expenses, and especially would require little further research to bring about cancer prevention in up to 80 percent.
Since this estimate was published, some thought 80% even to low. Yet prevention remained taboo and early diagnosis was the only consolation that was offered.
Why then does it happen that despite all this, so little is done towards the prevention of cancer? The answer has always been that one does not know what cancer, or the prime cause of cancer be, and that one cannot prevent something that is not known.
But nobody today can say that one does not know what cancer and its prime cause be. On the contrary, there is no disease whose prime cause is better known, so that today ignorance is no longer an excuse that one cannot do more about prevention. That prevention of cancer will come there is no doubt, for man wishes to survive. But how long prevention will be avoided depends on how long the prophets of agnosticism will succeed in inhibiting the application of scientific knowledge in the cancer field. In the meantime, millions of men must die of cancer unnecessarily.
Comment: If you are still reading then you are as convinced as we are that NaDCA treatment for all cancers, if taken as a supplement it must then prevent cancer also. It is good for your heart and in theory could prevent or reverse the effects of coronary artery disease. Of course, if tests are never done to prove any of this it will never be made available.
Time to re read this excerpt from the May 2010 press release below…
In 2007 the U of A team led by Dr Michelakis, published evidence that DCA reverses cancer growth in non-human models and test tubes. The team showed then that DCA achieves these antitumor effects by altering the metabolism of cancer. By altering the way cancer handles its nutrient fuels, specifically the sugars, DCA was able to take away cancer’s most important strength, the resistance to death. Since then, several independent groups across the world have confirmed the Alberta team’s findings. In December 2009, the editors of “Science” predicted that cancer metabolism is one of only 5 areas across all scientific disciplines, to “watch for major breakthroughs” in 2010.
The U of A team set out to show that the way that DCA works in actual patients is the same with the way it works in the lab. In addition, researchers wanted to show whether DCA is safe and possibly effective in very sick patients with brain cancer.
By extracting glioblastomas from 49 patients over a period of 2 years and studying them within minutes of removal in the operating room, the team showed that tumors respond to DCA by changing their metabolism. Then, the team treated 5 patients with advanced glioblastoma and secured tumor tissues before and after the DCA therapy. By comparing the two, the team showed that DCA works in these tumors exactly as was predicted by test tube experiments. This is very important because often the results in non-human models tested in the lab do not agree with the results in patients. In addition, the team showed that DCA has anti-cancer effects by altering the metabolism of glioblastoma cancer stem cells, the cells thought responsible for the recurrences of cancer.
In the 5 patients tested, the drug took 3 months to reach blood levels high enough to alter the tumor metabolism. At those levels, there were no significant adverse effects. However, at some of the higher doses tested, DCA caused nerve malfunction, i.e. numbing of toes and fingers. Importantly, in some patients there was also evidence for clinical benefit, with the tumors either regressing in size or not growing further during the 18-month study.
No conclusions can be made on whether the drug is safe or effective in patients with this form of brain cancer, due to the limited number of patients tested by the study’s leads Drs Michelakis and Petruk. Researchers emphasize that use of DCA by patients or physicians, supplied from for-profit sources or without close clinical observation by experienced medical teams in the setting of research trials, is not only inappropriate but may also be dangerous. The U of A results are encouraging and support the need for larger clinical trials with DCA. This work is also one of the first in humans to support the emerging idea that altering the metabolism of tumors is a new direction in the treatment of cancer, Michelakis and Petruk said.
Comment: This comment “ no conclusion” and “the warning not to use on your own” was required most likely by Health Canada, as NaDCA is so easy to use and is so safe that it is a crazy statement. What could happen? We could all get healthy, that would be bad, I guess they are counting on none of us doing the research and finding out how harmless NaDCA really is.
The research team hopes to secure additional funding to continue the ongoing trials with DCA at the University of Alberta. Further studies would include more patients with brain cancer, and test the combination of DCA and standard chemotherapies, eventually including patients from other academic health sciences centres.
Comment: So, the only thing they didn’t know in 1966 was that the mitochondria could be turned back on in a cancerous cell allowing the cell to cause apoptosis (cell suicide). This is exactly what NaDCA does, NaDCA does not kill the cancer! It turns the mitochondria back on so that the cancer cell kills itself. I can’t find any mention of the Phase 1 study on dosages and I assume the dosage was set by Health Canada in the protocol for the clinical trial, which was probably a low dosage of around 10mg per kg of body weight and the reason why it took 3 month to build up in the system. The most amazing item of note is that NaDCA altered the metabolism of the Glioblastoma cancer Stem Cells…….No current cancer treatment is known to do this!
What can you do?
If you are recently diagnosed with cancer, please re-read the information again on the lack of proof as to the effectiveness of the “standard therapies” and consider the damage to your body that these treatments are documented to cause. I won’t tell you not to take Chemo, Radiation or surgery as that is your choice, I will say that you will be pressured by the medical community, but always ask questions, it is your health and the statistics you are usually quoted are biased and usually the information is supplied to your doctor by the Drug Companies or Cancer Societies. When quoted a statistic always ask if the result is a relative or absolute statistic as the difference is huge! Please provide your doctor with the NaDCA info page, you do have freedom of choice in your treatment and should be able to ask to have your progress monitored, if your Doctor refuses, find another Doctor!
If you have had cancer and are concerned about it coming back you have a very valid concern as the chance of that happening is greater than 90%, and as you have seen if you have read this far the drugs that most cancer survivors are currently taking offer virtually no benefit at all and are carcinogenic
themselves. NaDCA may be your solution to clearing any remaining cancer cells from your body and enjoying the rest of your life without the worry of a cancer recurrence!
There is enough evidence out there now to support the claims that NaDCA is effective in treating cancer. It is quite possibly the powers that be will simply continue to try and discredit the effectiveness and let the few of us that do the research continue to get the product. The unfortunate truth is that most people will continue to follow whatever their doctor suggests, not realizing how tied his/her hands are in what they can tell you without risking their license.
Take NaDCA as a supplement, my family and I take NaDCA daily to avoid ever getting cancer and for the benefits to the heart. After about a week we noticed clearer thinking and increased energy and better circulation. See the study on NaDCA for athletic enhancement here.
As a result of NaDCA’s low molecular weight it could travel to all parts of the bodies’ tissue keeping arteries and small veins clear and oxygenated? In the process allowing your own immune system to operate at peak levels leaving our organs to heal themselves.
My 74-year-old father who has smoked for 55 years suffers from bad circulation and had a black spot beginning on one of his toes; his Doctor was saying if it was to get any worse it would need to be amputated. The black spot was gone in about 10 days. He also suffers from COPD and claims to have much more energy and greater endurance.
Send an Email to your local government representative, state or provincial, and federal. Tell them you are upset about the lack of support that this nontoxic, unpatented discovery is receiving and ask for their help, include a link to this site. Most politicians are completely unaware of this discovery and they have most likely been touched in their own families by cancer Tell your friends, it is hard to explain, the best way to help someone is to send them to this website, my intent is to share it on Facebook once a month because people tend not to pay attention until it hits close to home and the unfortunate truth is that every month in North America another 130,000 people are diagnosed with cancer and over 1 million people world wide.
The World Health Organization (WHO) stated that in 2000 over 10 million people were diagnosed with a malignant tumor and 6.2 million people died of a malignant tumor, these numbers are expected to increase by 50% by 2020. Not sure why blood cancers were not included but they were not.
If you start taking NaDCA, please report your progress on this site you have no idea who you may help by doing so!
What if DCA is a molecule that adds oxygen to our blood and balances out our sugar and PH levels? There has long been a theory that when we are “run down” we are more susceptible to illness and that illness and disease can not survive when our PH is more alkaline than acidic. Disease will not take hold in a PH balanced body! A swimming pool is a perfect analogy. I have had two homes with swimming pools, If I kept my PH perfect the water would be crystal clear, if it slipped below 7 on the PH scale it would start to get murky and if left that way for a few days it turned green from algae. It didn’t matter if all the algae were the same, as I am sure many different algae could be identified if analyzed. Much like cancer, however once I started adding chlorine the water would start to clear up and when it was back to proper PH all the algae were gone. I didn’t have to kill the specific type of algae just create an
environment in which it couldn’t survive. Our bodies are 60% water and our blood are 90% water, how important do you think our PH level is?
Is it possible that DCA is the chlorine puck for our bodies? The scientists will have a hay day with that statement; however, they were the same people spreading the propaganda that DCA was a poisonous chemotherapy drug that none of us should use.
What is interesting is sodium dichloroacetate is just a simple molecule that could easily be taken as a dietary supplement by perfectly healthy people and is considered by the EPA to have no mutagenic effect. It has been studied as a supplement for athletes, and to greatly reduce insulin requirements for diabetics. It has been proven effective in the treatment of heart and stroke patients and I would suggest could be useful in the prevention of heart attacks and strokes. All studies either in vitro or in vivo turned out great results; however, the non patentable nature of the compound stopped the studies from progressing to clinical trials as there would be no money in it. SOUND FAMILIAR? There is enough credible evidence that DCA cures cancer that I believe at this point the adverse publicity of forcing these sites to close could be more costly to big pharma then letting them continue to sell DCA. At some point this may change, as in 2007 when the FDA forced all sites to close.
What if a simple molecule could cure all cancers? A good friend of mine said to me that there is no way! If a cure for cancer was discovered the medical community would tell us!
As I said to her “They Did” the University of Alberta told us in 2007 and again in 2010, and I am telling you now!
The discovery was accidental and not expected by the industry, after all no one was working on a cancer cure; research by big Pharma has always been focused on expensive ways to treat the symptom not the cause. There is no money in curing someone especially with a simple molecule that cost a few dollars per day and no hospital stay.
They can’t afford to let you know how simple DCA is and how beneficial it is to be balancing our body, my hope is the information we have put together saves your life.
DCA watch does not provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. The information provided on this site is for the purposes of information only. You should not use this information to diagnose, cure or treat any health problem without consulting with a qualified and licensed healthcare professional.