Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
What can you tell me about about Cancer's Least Expensive Hope?
There is a new effort against cancer, based around Dichloroacetate. All I will say here is that it's tremendously promising, but there is no money in it for big pharma.
I am starting a website, http://www.dichloroacetate.org./ I want to see how can come up with the most interesting information on dichloroacetate. Something I don't know, or have overlooked, or an opinion I haven't thought of.
For any information, please provide sources.
Thank you kindly.
Thank you for your comments, Panda. I'm not intending to raise false hope, so much as emphasize that this drug, with all its promise, will probably never see a clinical trial due to economics.
I read the blog from the Cancer Society. I would have to agree with much of it, although it fails to address a solution for further DCA research, considering big pharma's disinterest. Otherwise, an excellent article.
I'm also aware of Cardiometabolics, although duely noted. If anything, they would only be able to get patents on intravenous injection of DCA, though. Since it can easily be taken orally, they're still a way away from making it potentially lucrative.
My best wishes to you and your family, and once again I do not intend to incite false hope.
oncogenome,
Although you brought up so very valid points, they were not your own. You referenced time magazine as if you were the first person to make that connection. Despite this, your comments are appreciated. I must point out that you used "anti-angiogenesis" as a reason NOT to pursue DCA...but then you went on to point out that anti-angiogenesis is actually being used today and can extend the life of patients.
So, I would question which side that arguement really supports. Finally, you summarized me, personally, by number of yahoo points...which is a strange concept in itself. Do you only listen to people with large yahoo points? In any case, if you care to look i have over 3 times the points that you have (if you somehow find this iimportant).
3 Answers
- PandaLv 71 decade agoFavorite Answer
There apparently is money in it for, CardioMetabolics Inc, the company that holds the patents using dichloroacetate for treating people with cancer. You better check with them first.
http://www.cnw.ca/fr/releases/archive/January2007/...
Then read what the American Cancer Society has to say about this:
http://www.cancer.org/aspx/blog/Comments.aspx?id=1...
And last, my son has an extremely rare cancer. He was diagnosed with a stage IV abdominal cancer. It is a devastating disease for this family. From all that I know of how complicated cancer is . . I have heard all this type of hype before. All I can say is . . until they can prove their claim with real Clinical Trials . . its just hype.
- oncogenomicsLv 41 decade ago
Flash back to 1998:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/printout/0,8816,...
On the cover of Time magazine, Dr. Judah Folkman of Children's Hospital in Boston announced the results of test in lab animals and cell cultures where he cured cancer with no major side effects. The mechanism was early anti-angiogenesis drugs: Angiostatin and Endostatin. People were declaring cancer would cured in 20 years.
What came of that was a new approach to combat cancer: attacking a tumor's blood supply. Research on anti-angiogenesis continues to this day. Some drugs using this principle have made it to market: Avastin, Erbitux, Tarceva, Iressa. They have extended the survival rates and times of patients with only minor side effects. For the most part, they are NOT cures.
This was prior to Internet forums such as this.
My point is cancer has been cured in the laboratory many times. To jump to a conclusion because of a preliminary report has proven wrong in the past and more than likely do so aagin.
My opinion is treatments like anti-angiogenesis drugs and possibly DCA work on the support mechanisms of cancer and not the cancer itself (genetic mutations). Therefore, such therapies are unlikely to produce a cure.
As for DCA specifically, the drug is not ready for human use. Read Dr. Evangelos own words on his website:
http://www.depmed.ualberta.ca/dca/
The University of Alberta is continuing with its research and is planning on conducting clinical trials. If the results of those trials are promising, I am all for promoting DCA as a treatment. Right now, it's much too early.
There has been alot of questions recently posted on this forum by users such as yourself hyping DCA as a cancer cure. All these account profiles have little history (points). I must assume that these posters are the same person or an associated group of people who have some (financial) motivation to promote DCA.