Anyone used 3bp (3-bromopyruvate)?

5080 Posts | Page(s): Prev 12...494 495 496 497 498 ...507508 Next 

RE: Anyone used 3bp (3-bromopyruvate)?

by Jcancom on Wed Jan 09, 2019 06:14 AM

Quote | Reply

JohnnyP, this is an all time high for me on this thread! As you can tell by looking back on previous posts, I have been on thread for years. Many many of our thread friends are no longer alive. None of those who have sought help here have received any meaningful assistance.

Yet, after all this bleakness we have finally hit some sunshine!

One of the main motivations for the thread over all of these years was to try and find what the successful metabolic clinics were doing. We have been aware for quite some time about the basic protocols at Dayspring and in Turkey, though when those on thread tried the basic treatment, it never helped them.

Why not? What were we doing wrong? It is quite extraordinary! D tried heroically to help his wife with nearly constant infusions and yet he still lost her. It has been tragically sad for those on our thread.

Now after all of these years it looks like we finally have cleared the first hurdle of understanding: metabolic treatments need to be given metronomically. We finally introduced this to some of the patients on D's forum and the results have been stunning over the last few months. Some of these tumors have imploded! This is exactly what one would expect if their energy supply were taken away over prolonged periods of time.

Cancer is a Metabolic Disease is no longer a mantra, or a prayer or a shared delusion: It is a proven fact.

JohnnyP we have not seen this yet with a breast cancer patient (perhaps your wife could be the first), though from  our current understanding, the extensive case histories on the Turkish clinic's website and on Dayspring's over essentially all major cancer types are completely consistent with our expected treatment expectations.

Patients who might have waited because they were unsure about the treatment approach of these clinics should no longer retain these doubts. The results that these metabolic clinics have posted are precisely what one would expect given their treatment approach. Using this metabolic strategy should predictably yield consistent successes. The nearly 4 year median survival of the Turkish clinic's stage IV lung cancer patients was extremely impressive. It should not be entirely unexpected that as this approach is adopted globally that others will improve upon it.

The Turkish clinic has recently went soft focus and patientcentric with only videos. The Wayback Machine, though, shows the site from a year ago when they thought it necessary to present actual patient scans. There are very extensive patient reports that they uploaded for dozens of patients with most of the major cancer types. The fact that they have went somewhat soft on the science indicates to me that they no longer feel it even necessary to plead their position exclusively on hard outcomes. Hard outcomes have already been amply demonstrated.  

There is now many exciting enhancements that could improve upon what has already been achieved. The latest excitement is with citrate and gluconate. There are so many of these metabolic vulnerabilities to explore!

Yes, it is not easy to understand why this has been such a struggle to generate any mass interest in this. Most of the metabolic leadership spend a great deal of their energy  marketing metabolics to the masses.

It has the feeling that they are trying to start a fire with soggy wood. Partly this is a result of the ambivalent nature of all science. Even after tumors essentially disappeared overnight in all treated animals 20 years ago with 3-BP, more studies and then more studies and then yet more studies were thought necessary. Then they started publishing human reports of instant tumor implosion and it was still thought necessary for more studies and then more studies. All these studies wear everyone down.

One turbo-charger for me now is the idea that all of the metabolic successes can be put into the same bin. We can basically start to talk of thousands of patients that have been treated with what are metronomic metabolic protocols. With such a colossal patient database, objections to basic metabolic theory are transparently invalid.

Objecting to 1 liver patient 3-BP cancer success story seems reasonable. And then even with a melanoma patient, and even with a lung patient, and perhaps with the other liver patients; and then possibly with several clinics in the world. Yet, when you add in yet more and larger patient series and essentially equal metabolic protocols involving hundreds of patients from Scotland in the 1970s, and a wide range of patient reports with vitamin C, and then with fasting, and then with citrate and on and on. Metabolic treatment is no longer open to informed argument.   

This is a true moment of revealation for me, as I had not thought of it in this way until I saw the video that you posted. The video showed patient outcomes which were close to what we have also witnessed. Patients who experience metabolic type responses can be recognized no matter which particular clinic or which particular variant is used. A range of metabolic approaches have generated the typical metabolic phenotype response.  

I also would have thought that the idea would somehow work up the organizational structure of our society. As you noted $3 million is not an excessive amount of money. Thought leaders have been fully aware of 3-BP for almost 15 years. For whatever reason, rationality has not prevailed. The next best strategy has been to try and bring this to the people. Yet, trying to teach biochemistry (especially when there are so many contradictions and unknown) can be an uphill struggle.  

Glad that you are making an effort to work through all of this. Get going on your metabolic strategies!

 

RE: Anyone used 3bp (3-bromopyruvate)?

by JohnnyP on Wed Jan 09, 2019 07:08 AM

Quote | Reply

J:

I think I know the reason for Shirley"s high glucose readings.  I was reading the report from her first MRI the other day.  It noted a fatty liver, so she was an undiagnosed pre-diabetic as I was.  Our PCP never ordered a fasting insulin test for either of us, only relying on a once a year glucose test along with the normal blood panel.

So, besides being pre-diabetic, she is probably insulin resistant, though not as bad as I am.  And, she asks for carby treats to fill out her 20g per day allowance.

I've been watching Dr. Annette Bosworth (Dr. Boz).  She has simplied Seyfried's Glucoe-Ketone-Index to one simple calculation.  Divide your glucose reading in mg/dL by your ketone reading.  Her guidelines are 80 for health, 40 for weight loss, and 20 for cancer.

RE: Anyone used 3bp (3-bromopyruvate)?

by Jcancom on Fri Jan 11, 2019 05:28 AM

Quote | Reply

JohnnyP, I am not sure how to cope with that one. It would be so much easier if doctors could be partners in helping their patients. This typically does not seem to be how the system works out.

Having a centralized treatment regimen for disease clearly makes sense when there are highly effective treatments that have been developed. In fact, in such a scenario there would be no other morally acceptable system. Yet, when some cancers have average life expectancies measured in months, the moral imperative would no longer favor centralization but decentralization. Perhaps the most reasonable structural change should be toward devolving authority back to the state level. Centralization of authority should only occur when reasonably effective solutions exist for problems, not when they don't. This rush to global centralization has given patients and citizens less freedom of choice and less room for the innovation that will finally solve our problems. 

Sorry JohnnY for all of these suggestions. As you mentioned within your current treatment environment, none of them might be of use to you. The people who we seem to be able to reach out to best are those with some background in medicine or at least willing to learn how to give ivs etc and also have access to chemical stores with a supporting doctor. This opens a very wide landcape of treatments. Almost any cancer themed journal now has curative treatments up to multiple times per year. 25 years ago even curing mice of metastatic cancer was not possible. Since then it has probably been many thousands of times. Considering how well preserved metabolism has been over the last few billion years, it would not be terribly unexpected that some metabolic treatments will translate into humans.A brief survey of scientific literature would hint that some should alrady have.

This is very good thinking about the general idea of formulation that you noted with nanocurcumin. There is a near endless list of nanoformulations. Curcumin and so many other natural medicines are well known to have very poor absorption. It is very close to magical when you see what happens with the correct formulation of a drug. The best that I have seen is with the minicells. This can give upwards of a million fold reduction in dosing over straight chemo while maintaining efficacy. It is quite startling.

JohnnyP, you are totally correct about not wanting to go off road with cancer treatment. It is not an effective approach. You greatly need an entire team of people who are there to help you. Some of the people on D's forum appear to have been able to create their own oncology hospital at home with off site visits to various cancer clinics. Clearly the day of drive through oncology is approaching, though it is still on the horizon. Presently, for the DIYers it is more of a 24/7 struggle to find something that will help. After a several year effort, we finally appear to have started finding some of the pieces of the puzzle.

Thank you very much for the link to the video. It was good to think again about the results from the Turkish clinic. There approach now is comprehensible to us.

I had thought that what we were dealing with was metronomic metabolic therapy, though the video clarified for me that it is more metonomic metabolic chemotherapy. The metabolic therapy appears to potentiate chemotherapy. What is now still a great mystery to me is how straight metronomic metabolic therapy could be effectively applied.

I am also unsure about what recourse would exist once the lines of chemotherapy ran out. Going metabolic at that point would require a comprehensive view of metabolic escape routes.

Best Wishes and keep up your efforts to understand and treat cancer! 

         

RE: Anyone used 3bp (3-bromopyruvate)?

by JohnnyP on Fri Jan 11, 2019 10:48 PM

Quote | Reply

J:

I went to Travis Christofferson's site and sent this message:

Travis:  I became interested in cancer research when my wife was diagnosed with stage 4 breast cancer in her spine.  Of course, I have us both on a very low carb diet.  Thanks so much for writing your book and teaching us about 3BP.  There is real hope for a cure.

I watched Dr. Mercola's youtube video with you, allowing Dr. Slocum time to make his presentation.  I was amazed at the before and after PET scan images using treatments proposed by Dr. Seyfried and Dr. D'Agastino.  These guys are my heroes.

Did I read correctly that Dr. Ko was looking for $3M to do a small trial?  How different things might be if you could persuade just one wealthy celebrity suffering from cancer, to undergo these non toxic therapies and have a complete response.

Did you try approaching Senator John McCain?  I think I saw Dr. Seyfried say he had no contact with his family about this.  I just read that Olivia Newton John's cancer has spread to her spine.  The article was from a few months ago and said she has changed her diet to low sugar, which tells me she is already employing a metabolic approach and may be open to therapies put into practice by Dr. Slocum.

You have to go where the money is.  $3M is $50 from 60,000 people like us, or perhaps one grateful, wealthy survivor.  And the publicity would be priceless.

Thanks again for working with Dr. Ko.

John and Shirley

RE: Anyone used 3bp (3-bromopyruvate)?

by Jcancom on Sat Jan 12, 2019 03:57 AM

Quote | Reply

JohnnyP, this is a very exciting time for me! I have been thinking a great deal about cancer recently and some of the pieces are falling into place for me.

Thank you again for posting the video link! I believe that I have some insight into how this clinic achieved their results. It is diasppointing, though, how skimpy their patient reports are. In this current age of open science, patient files and all data points should be fully disclosed. Everything should be uploaded to the net: 21st Century science. There should be an overflowing quantity of data.  

In particular, from their pancreatic patient series, CA 19-9 measurements could be notable. There is a large literature related to CA 19-9 levels in these patients. Watching the evolution of these numbers might yet more proof of their approach.

Why hasn't the clinical research from the Turkish clinic migrated to pubmed? Doesn't all global scientific/medical research wind up there? The pancreatic study was in JOP, which does not appear to be indexed in pubmed. I can't find the lung cancer study either as a fully published paper. The lung cancer results were stunning! Will it just all go away if it isn't published? I want to carefully read all the details so that I am sure that I completely understand their results. These are headline results, if true. Is there any metastatic lung cancer trial that is even remotely close?

The triple negative breast cancer patient from their clinic wound up on Cureus. Far be it for me to introduce a wiff of scientific snobbery to our thread, though for those who might be unfamiliar with Cureus, it appears to be a site where people vote on scientific stories. If I recall correctly, the triple negative breast cancer patient report was in the running for a people's choice award. Even now it is one of the higher ranked reports on the site.

Strangely, the metabolic approach to cancer might only ever enter the clinic if the people can be brought into the discussion. The science has long been settled. Much of what is now reported about metabolics has a certain marketing feel to it. We the people, might need to buy up the biochemistry textbook and read it. Basically, democratic science.

Typically, I would find this scary if not alarming: Do we really want to vote on cancer research? Shouldn't we just leave it up to the experts? We already have and look what happened! For those interested, the people basically did vote for metabolic cancer treatment. This is not overly surprising as the people typically make the right call. I would say that the Yeas have it.

If I try my very very best to be objective, the last century of cancer research has been enormously disappointing. It is telling to me that so much of our disucssion is devoted to revive the good old days with Warburg and even earlier!  

With regards to the money needed for 3-BP, a few million already were raised last year to start a clinical trial. If I recall correctly, that was the same day they charged the CEO for unpaid parking tickets and sent him to jail. It really is sad and fairly pathetic. This has been maturing on the shelf now for almost 20 years and not that much has moved forward. The clinical trial is now perhaps finally approaching. Yet, starting a clinical trial might even result in the pace of development slowing further. With a phase 1 clinical trial they would likely leisurely treat patients over many years. We already know that a very substantial number of patients have received 3-BP in an unformulated version! What I found especially unexpected about Bracht was how extensive their patient files were. They talked about perhaps 200 patients that were treated with 3-BP. It is not easy to work through all the smoke and mirrors, though 3-BP reasonably has already accumulated a phase 2 size treatment group from the Bracht patients alone!

This is very frustrating for everyone. What we have finally realized on this thread about 3-BP was widely understood by a range of thought leaders up to 20 years ago and it still has not been able to make a great deal of forward progress.

Something I discovered today offered me a glimmer of hope. Over the years posters on the thread have asked about biomarkers for MCT-1 expression. MCT-1 expression has been found to be of great importance for 3-BP effectiveness. What I read today might help address this problem and also have a wider impact on 3-BP clinical translation. Apparently, there is a tracer that is already used that could be of interest. The C11 acetate tracer uses a modified form of acetate. Of particular importance here is that acetate enters the cell through MCT-1. On a first run-through this appears quite promising. We know that some patients will respond to 3-BP. Published patient reports already exist. Yet, without selection patient outcomes are unpredictable.

If C11 acetate could predict which patients will respond to 3-BP, then perhaps a patient lead movement will form that advocates for early compassionate use. We have already seen how dramatic responses can be with 3-BP. It likely would not take very long nor many successful patient reports for compassionate use 3-BP to emerge. This might finally be a dramatic driver for 3-BP. If a patient could present a C11 acetate scan that lit up the tumor it would be ethically challenging to deny such a patient access to 3-BP treatment. In fact as we are all too aware to turn such a patient away from mainstream medicine would be highly unethical as 3-BP in such a circumstance of overwhelming treatment response would pose a large risk of TLS.It might take as few as 1 hundred cancer patients to identify what I would categorize as a super responder. Perhaps we could setup a crowdfunding project for such a purpose.      

Wih the Turkish results, my understanding is that they basically potentiated chemo with metabolics. With pancreatic cancer they extended out survival for roughly a year, for lung cancer perhaps 3 years. Additional metabolic treatments could improve this. Yet, it was still related to using chemo power. Once resistance occurred then the metabolic enhancement might no longer be enough.

Front line metabolic treatment would be a real game changer. It would offer the potential of a treatment that did not have the detrimental effects of chemo, while having large responses. Once 3-BP entered the clinic, then an entire ecosystem of products could emerge to support it. Notably, this would allow a mostly non-toxic alternative to emerge.    

JohnnyP, every once and a while we all need a boost to confirm our belief in the metabolic approach. Take a look at this one!   https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=29633614

This is very very startling! Basically I would describe it as a Warburg motor. What it is doing is taking in glucose and producing oxygen. This is what we have been droning on endlessly for years and years about. You can read online websites that mock the idea that sugar is an important part of cancer. Many anti-cancer strategies that sincerely try to help people reduce glucose levels and increase oxygen levels at the whole body level require a near heroic effort to achieve (AS you noted even in patients with metastatic cancer it can still be difficult not to have the odd cookie here and there). What were to happen if glucose levels could be reduced and oxygen increased at the cell level in cancer?

Wow! Massive results in vivo. They injected the Warburg motor into tumors and the results, though entirely in line with expectations, were startling! There was no tumor growth over a 2 week treatment interval, the tumors appeared to be shrinking. It is not entiely obvious to me why they only went with a 2 week treatment, yet my guess would be that this treatment effect would carry forward in time. It would be even more convincing if they could somehow cleanly manipulate glucose levels, though this is very close.

This essentially ends the discussion for me about the metabolic perspective. Those who continue to question metabolic theory in light of these results are simply not being honest. 

As a follow-on they might consider adding in even more specificity (e.g. they could make it into a mitocan and see if this could deplete the glucose supply to HK2.) Or perhaps they could even make it so that only glucose levels declined in the cancer cells!Adding in a logic circuit and possibly an on/off switch would also be a nice touch.

I would also like to see what might happen if they were to introduce a fuel cell to the mitochondria. That would be extremely interesting! They could kick start the mitochondria with oxygen and hydrogen!

JohnnyP, do you have a PGS for breast cacner for your wife? Gene chips now only cost about $50. The cost for the PGS should not be unreasonable. The PGS would give you an indication of the polygenic risk faced by your wife and perhaps could give you some insight into underlying metabolic factors involved. This would be a good one to look into.

Also, have you considered a continuous glucose monitor? I found it surprising how high your wife's glucose readings were. Research has found that tumor growth is related to gluocse levels. Perhaps with a continuous glucose monitor you could develop insight into what caused the readings to fluctuate and manipulate them accordingly. 

Best Wishes

RE: Anyone used 3bp (3-bromopyruvate)?

by JohnnyP on Sat Jan 12, 2019 07:47 PM

Quote | Reply

Thank you for the links, but on a quick look, I'm not impressed with the last references.  They compare whey protein supplement against mouse chow.  Anything is better than carb rich Purina mouse chow.

Compare Immunocal to the MCT oil plus fats plus protein study I posted above, where cachexia was reversed and weight increased two kg the first week.

RE: Anyone used 3bp (3-bromopyruvate)?

by Jcancom on Sun Jan 13, 2019 04:57 AM

Quote | Reply

Yesterday, I posted my first skim through on the C11 acetate PET scan. Today, I did a check through and it appears to hold together.

Acetic acid enters cancer cells through MCT-1. For clarity acetic is the second simplest carboxylic acid aside from formic acid (aka ant acid). At physiological pH acetic acid would be in the form of acetate, so a C11 acetate PET scan could be fairly cancer specific. (MCT-1 stands for monocarboxylate transporter -1). The thinking here is that if acetic acid can get through the MCT-1 transporter, so should 3-BP!

This could be of very great importance for 3-BP development. Those patients who had a PET scan that clearly showed that they would be good responders to 3-BP would be nearly impossible to dissuade from seeking treatment. How would it be ethical to prevent a putative responder with PET scan verified MCT-1 expression to do otherwise? This would also reopen the question of when treatment should begin.

With the liver patient, the ethical review board waited to the very last minute to OK starting treatment, even though the last line treatment was already past its expected response interval. Knowing that Yvar would have a massive massive response before treatment even began would greatly change the ethical landscape. Notably, at his last labs there were no liver cancer cells discovered. The most relevant and proximal cause of his dismise was his near absence of liver function. It clearly would not be ethical to withhold 3-BP treatment as long was done in his circumstance with the technology currently in development.  

Over the years a fair number of the cancer patients on our thread have asked what can they do to find out if they have MCT-1 expression? I was not sure how to answer that one. There are tests that are reported to be in development, though it was never actually clear what one might need to do to actually order one. None of the websites seemed to have a credit card that you could use to buy one. 

What appears to be a truly large breakthrough idea is that C11 acetate PET scan IS an MCT-1 scan! This is quite interesting and perhaps of great importance. One might go to clinical trials.gov to look up NCT01304485.

Oh, MY! There is a 1500 patient prostate cancer phase 2 trial now underway for over 7 years with C11 Acetate? I think I might have asked this one earlier on the thread: Anyone know where Phoenix is?

Very exciting! Very Very Exciting!

Clearly I would want to obtain a copy of the informed consent form. I would tend to think that an ethical ethical review board would have qualms not disclosing to prospective patients that 3-BP was known to enter via MCT-1 and could offer patients with high MCT-1 expression a highly plausible treatment choice. This is super super awesome! When they publish the report we will finally have a very good look at the rate of MCT-1 expression in prostate cancer. It clearly does make one wonder if another facility in Arizona might receive some of the high expression MCT-1 patients from Phoenix.   

Patients who qualify for this trial might consider jumping on a plane to Arizona, the trial is reported to be still recruiting. Knowing whether or not you have high and consistent MCT-1 expression would be of great value in determining if 3-BP would be a suitable treatment choice.

 

RE: Anyone used 3bp (3-bromopyruvate)?

by JohnnyP on Sun Jan 13, 2019 05:47 AM

Quote | Reply

Weird, I replied to a post about Immunocal, but it's gone now. 

RE: Anyone used 3bp (3-bromopyruvate)?

by Jcancom on Mon Jan 14, 2019 04:11 AM

Quote | Reply

JohnnyP, so much exciting research out there to explore.

-Remember that ketosis is only stage 1 of the metabolic cancer plan. Of course, for many it would be the most difficult to achieve. Step 2 is to lower glucose levels. This greatly amplifies the anti-tumor effect.

-Exercise appears to be an intriguing and powerful anti-cancer treatment approach.

 I was reading about exercise research research where runners moved up to 10 mph running. What was quite interesting was how high this pushed up their lactate acid levels. What I found of note is that by simply doing an intervention such as that you could manipulate the entire pH balance of each body. This could put enormous stress on cancer cells. What would happen if the cancer cell all of a sudden faced a lactate level that were perhaps 5 mmol higher than it experienced even 5 minutes before? Cancer cells need to export lactic acid out of the cell and this is based on pH. An article I read mentioned that changing pH levels can dramatically change the pH balance faced by the cancer cell. I think the idea was that if the outside pH increased, then the cancer to stay in equilibrium would need to hold onto its acid. Even relatively small changes would be expected to have large effects on the cancer cell.

This would need to be done through a professional as overacidifying the body especially in a cancer setting would obviously be dangerous. Many people with cancer who exercise likely never push into the lactate growth zone. Yet, at a certain point of exercise intensity, body lactate levels appear to increae exponentially.

What is also of interest is that portable lactate monitors can be purchased. They seem to cost somewhere around $250. We have talked on thread about these before, though they now appear to have even greater utility than I originally thought. With one of these monitors you could have essentially a real time monitor on the activity level of the tumor mass of a patient. There are a number of reports that I have seen in pubmed in which patients had fatal TLS incidents which resulted from up to a few days in which tumor status was not assessed. With a lactate monitor, you could be aware of glycolytic tumor status on a minute to minute basis. It has to be worth it to buy one of these.    

Best Wishes

RE: Anyone used 3bp (3-bromopyruvate)?

by JohnnyP on Mon Jan 14, 2019 09:18 PM

Quote | Reply

The oncologist does not ask for LDH reading in the monthly blood panel.  I requested it be added a couple months ago so she approved it just that one time.  The reading was in the normal range.

Shirley cannot do any exercise.  Her spine is damaged and both shoulders have rotator injuries from years ago that were never fixed.

I read that berberine can lower glucose levels, so I will order some and give it a try.

I remember one of the early guys in this thread set up a home lab to do 3BP IV's.  It didn't work so he tried DCA, but over dosed, I think?  Fatally?  I didn't see any more posts from him.

5080 Posts | Page(s): Prev 12...494 495 496 497 498 ...507508 Next 
Subscribe to this message board discussion

Latest Messages

View More

We care about your feedback. Let us know how we can improve your CancerCompass experience.