Re: Cheap, safe drug kills most cancers

[Guest guest]

This sounds interesting, until one reads, " DCA can cause pain,

numbness and gait disturbances in some patients... " This indicates

neurological damage. I'm not eager to be permanently disabled to

cure my cancer. (Yes, we have cured your cancer, but now you have

permanent brain damage!)

Also, " Studies of the TCE metabolites dichloroacetic acid (DCA) ,

trichloroacetic acid (TCA) , and chloral hydrate suggest that both

DCA and TCA are involved in TCE-induced liver tumorigenesis and that

many DCA effects are consistent with conditions that increase the

risk of liver cancer in humans. " (Causes liver cancer. Not a nice

side effect.) (Environ Health Perspect. 2006 Sep;114(9):1457-63)

And, " DCA at 25 mg/kg/day is associated with peripheral nerve

toxicity resulting in a high rate of medication discontinuation and

early study termination. Under these experimental conditions, the

authors were unable to detect any beneficial effect. The findings

show that DCA-associated neuropathy overshadows the assessment of

any potential benefit in MELAS (a neurodegenerative disease). "

(Neurology. 2006 Feb 14;66(3):324-30.)

Perhaps this is the starting point of new, effective drugs against

cancer. Certainly the idea of involving the mitochondria is

intriguing. As is, this drug has real, and severe, potential side

effects. And, of course, we have no understanding of whether it

would have any affect on CLL cells.

>

> Blank

> Cheap, safe drug kills most cancers

> 11:58 17 January 2007

> From New Scientist Print Edition.

> Andy Coghlan

>

> What makes cancer cells different - and how to kill them

>

> It sounds almost too good to be true: a cheap and simple drug that

kills almost all cancers by switching off their " immortality " . The

drug, dichloroacetate (DCA), has already been used for years to

treat rare metabolic disorders and so is known to be relatively

safe.

> It also has no patent, meaning it could be manufactured for a

fraction of the cost of newly developed drugs.

>

> Evangelos Michelakis of the University of Alberta in Edmonton,

Canada, and his colleagues tested DCA on human cells cultured

outside the body and found that it killed lung, breast and brain

cancer cells, but not healthy cells. Tumours in rats deliberately

infected with human cancer also shrank drastically when they were

fed DCA-laced water for several weeks.

>

> DCA attacks a unique feature of cancer cells: the fact that they

make their energy throughout the main body of the cell, rather than

in distinct organelles called mitochondria. This process, called

glycolysis, is inefficient and uses up vast amounts of sugar.

>

> Until now it had been assumed that cancer cells used glycolysis

because their mitochondria were irreparably damaged. However,

Michelakis's experiments prove this is not the case, because DCA

reawakened the mitochondria in cancer cells. The cells then withered

and died (Cancer Cell, DOI: 10.1016/j.ccr.2006.10.020).

>

> Michelakis suggests that the switch to glycolysis as an energy

source occurs when cells in the middle of an abnormal but benign

lump don't get enough oxygen for their mitochondria to work

properly. In order to survive, they switch off their mitochondria

and start producing energy through glycolysis.

>

> Crucially, though, mitochondria do another job in cells: they

activate apoptosis, the process by which abnormal cells self-

destruct. When cells switch mitochondria off, they

become " immortal " , outliving other cells in the tumour and so

becoming dominant. Once reawakened by DCA, mitochondria reactivate

apoptosis and order the abnormal cells to die.

>

> " The results are intriguing because they point to a critical role

that mitochondria play: they impart a unique trait to cancer cells

that can be exploited for cancer therapy, " says Dario Altieri,

director of the University of Massachusetts Cancer Center in

Worcester.

>

> The phenomenon might also explain how secondary cancers form.

Glycolysis generates lactic acid, which can break down the collagen

matrix holding cells together. This means abnormal cells can be

released and float to other parts of the body, where they seed new

tumours.

>

> DCA can cause pain, numbness and gait disturbances in some

patients, but this may be a price worth paying if it turns out to be

effective against all cancers. The next step is to run clinical

trials of DCA in people with cancer. These may have to be funded by

charities, universities and governments: pharmaceutical companies

are unlikely to pay because they can't make money on unpatented

medicines. The pay-off is that if DCA does work, it will be easy to

manufacture and dirt cheap.

>

> e, a cancer cell biologist at the University of Dundee

in the UK, says the findings challenge the current assumption that

mutations, not metabolism, spark off cancers. " The question is:

which comes first? " he says.

>

> http://www.newscientist.com:80/article/dn10971?DCMP=NLC-

nletter & nsref=dn10971

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I think 's concerns about the toxicities of DCA are valid, and

he has identified literature references that are representative of

what is known about those toxicities, which are a concern for any

human use of DCA, whether for cancer or for a metabolic disorder.

The notion that DCA is a starting point for more effective, less

toxic agents is also valid because the mechanisms of DCA's actions

have been studied for some time. Even 26 years ago, when I was a

researcher in the NIH Laboratory of Metabolism, DCA was one of the

inhibiting agents being studied there for different metabolic effects.

DCA switches cellular metabolism from anaerobic to aerobic by

stimulating the pyruvate dehydrogenase (PDH) complex, such that

carbon energy in the form of pyruvate is metabolized in the Kreb's

cycle instead of being converted to lactate. The mechanism by which

DCA (and other halogenated acetate derivatives) stimulate PDH is by

inhibiting one or more of the four kinase(s) that phosphorylate PDH.

Although a lot of work has been done, including by pharma companies,

on developing drugs that regulate PDH kinases, most of that work,

until recently, has been in developing drugs for metabolic

conditions, like diabetes. Now that more focus is on cancer, more

research is being done specifically with cancer cells such that the

mechanisms of PDH kinase(s) inhibition will be better defined for

designing anti-cancer molecules, as alternatives to DCA that have

fewer undesirable side-effects.

As indicates, DCA's ability to kill lung, breast or brain

cancer cells may mean nothing related to DCA (or similar drugs) to

kill CLL cells. I expect that research will be done; time will

tell, since the study of the effects of DCA-like molecules on cancer

is new arena. I've already asked one of the DCA cancer researchers

who I know whether he has considered leukemia cells.

Al Janski

======

From: " S. " <scott_fs@...>

Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 22:49:12 -0000

Subject: Re: Cheap, safe drug kills most cancers

This sounds interesting, until one reads, " DCA can cause pain,

numbness and gait disturbances in some patients... " This indicates

neurological damage. I'm not eager to be permanently disabled to

cure my cancer. (Yes, we have cured your cancer, but now you have

permanent brain damage!)

Also, " Studies of the TCE metabolites dichloroacetic acid (DCA) ,

trichloroacetic acid (TCA) , and chloral hydrate suggest that both

DCA and TCA are involved in TCE-induced liver tumorigenesis and that

many DCA effects are consistent with conditions that increase the

risk of liver cancer in humans. " (Causes liver cancer. Not a nice

side effect.) (Environ Health Perspect. 2006 Sep;114(9):1457-63)

And, " DCA at 25 mg/kg/day is associated with peripheral nerve

toxicity resulting in a high rate of medication discontinuation and

early study termination. Under these experimental conditions, the

authors were unable to detect any beneficial effect. The findings

show that DCA-associated neuropathy overshadows the assessment of

any potential benefit in MELAS (a neurodegenerative disease). "

(Neurology. 2006 Feb 14;66(3):324-30.)

Perhaps this is the starting point of new, effective drugs against

cancer. Certainly the idea of involving the mitochondria is

intriguing. As is, this drug has real, and severe, potential side

effects. And, of course, we have no understanding of whether it

would have any affect on CLL cells.

=====

< >

From: " Gach " <unclewolf@...>

Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 12:22:51 -0800

Subject: Cheap, safe drug kills most cancers

Blank

Cheap, safe drug kills most cancers

11:58 17 January 2007

From New Scientist Print Edition.

Andy Coghlan

What makes cancer cells different - and how to kill them

It sounds almost too good to be true: a cheap and simple drug that

kills almost all cancers by switching off their " immortality " . The

drug, dichloroacetate (DCA), has already been used for years to treat

rare metabolic disorders and so is known to be relatively safe.

It also has no patent, meaning it could be manufactured for a

fraction of the cost of newly developed drugs.

Evangelos Michelakis of the University of Alberta in Edmonton,

Canada, and his colleagues tested DCA on human cells cultured outside

the body and found that it killed lung, breast and brain cancer

cells, but not healthy cells. Tumours in rats deliberately infected

with human cancer also shrank drastically when they were fed

DCA-laced water for several weeks.

DCA attacks a unique feature of cancer cells: the fact that they make

their energy throughout the main body of the cell, rather than in

distinct organelles called mitochondria. This process, called

glycolysis, is inefficient and uses up vast amounts of sugar.

Until now it had been assumed that cancer cells used glycolysis

because their mitochondria were irreparably damaged. However,

Michelakis's experiments prove this is not the case, because DCA

reawakened the mitochondria in cancer cells. The cells then withered

and died (Cancer Cell, DOI: 10.1016/j.ccr.2006.10.020).

Michelakis suggests that the switch to glycolysis as an energy source

occurs when cells in the middle of an abnormal but benign lump don't

get enough oxygen for their mitochondria to work properly. In order

to survive, they switch off their mitochondria and start producing

energy through glycolysis.

Crucially, though, mitochondria do another job in cells: they

activate apoptosis, the process by which abnormal cells

self-destruct. When cells switch mitochondria off, they become

" immortal " , outliving other cells in the tumour and so becoming

dominant. Once reawakened by DCA, mitochondria reactivate apoptosis

and order the abnormal cells to die.

" The results are intriguing because they point to a critical role

that mitochondria play: they impart a unique trait to cancer cells

that can be exploited for cancer therapy, " says Dario Altieri,

director of the University of Massachusetts Cancer Center in Worcester.

The phenomenon might also explain how secondary cancers

form. Glycolysis generates lactic acid, which can break down the

collagen matrix holding cells together. This means abnormal cells can

be released and float to other parts of the body, where they seed new tumours.

DCA can cause pain, numbness and gait disturbances in some patients,

but this may be a price worth paying if it turns out to be effective

against all cancers. The next step is to run clinical trials of DCA

in people with cancer. These may have to be funded by charities,

universities and governments: pharmaceutical companies are unlikely

to pay because they can't make money on unpatented medicines. The

pay-off is that if DCA does work, it will be easy to manufacture and

dirt cheap.

e, a cancer cell biologist at the University of Dundee in

the UK, says the findings challenge the current assumption that

mutations, not metabolism, spark off cancers. " The question is: which

comes first? " he says.

http://www.newscientist.com:80/article/dn10971?DCMP=NLC-nletter & nsref=dn10971

[Guest guest]

Where can anyone buy dichloroacetate? I can't find anywhere at all on

the internet that it's available, either as a supplement or as a

prescription drug.

Anyone have any info on where it's available?

Not that anyone ought to pop off and just start taking it. But I would

like to see someplace that even sells it. So far, I have turned up

nothing, maybe because it is only used to treat " rare metabolic

disorders. "

[Guest guest]

Cannot find dichloroacetate/DCA/Ceresine for sale ANYWHERE. I am giving

up and going to bed.

>

> Where can anyone buy dichloroacetate? I can't find anywhere at all on

> the internet that it's available, either as a supplement or as a

> prescription drug.

>

> Anyone have any info on where it's available?

>

> Not that anyone ought to pop off and just start taking it. But I

would

> like to see someplace that even sells it. So far, I have turned up

> nothing, maybe because it is only used to treat " rare metabolic

> disorders. "

>

[Guest guest]

Perhaps an alternative physician might know. Let us know if you find out

anything.

Best,

RB

  Posted by: " breathedeepnow " aug20@... breathedeepnow   Date:

Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:47 pm ((PST))

Cannot find dichloroacetate/DCA/Ceresine for sale ANYWHERE. I am giving

up and going to bed.

Where can anyone buy dichloroacetate? I can't find anywhere at all on

the internet that it's available, either as a supplement or as a

prescription drug.

Anyone have any info on where it's available?

Not that anyone ought to pop off and just start taking it. But I would

like to see someplace that even sells it. So far, I have turned up

nothing, maybe because it is only used to treat " rare metabolic

disorders. "

[Guest guest]

Thanks, . Appreciate your making us aware of DCA.

Maybe an alternative physician might now, but the strange thing is that

I have turned up absolutely nothing at all, using several different

ways to search.

I am going to contact a chemist or two that I know to see what they say.

Anyone else that finds a place that sells it, please do let us know.

[Guest guest]

A chemistry professor writes:

" It would be amazing if this thing works as advertised.  Simplicity

itself. "

Almost any basic chemistry or biochemisry student would agree. We'll

have to see what develops.

On 1/19/07, Blau <robert-blau@... > wrote:

Very interesting article that gives some insights into the nature of

cancer cells re oxygen metabolism. It would be great if this drug could

work. Chemically, it*s very simple, structurally speaking. We shall see

.. . .

Cheap, safe drug kills most cancers

===================================

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn10971-cheap-safe-drug-kills-most-cancers.h\

tml

It sounds almost too good to be true: a cheap and simple drug that kills

almost all cancers by switching off their " immortality " . The drug,

dichloroacetate (DCA), has already been used for years to treat rare

metabolic disorders and so is known to be relatively safe.

[Guest guest]

A chemistry professor writes:

" It would be amazing if this thing works as advertised.  Simplicity

itself. "

Almost any basic chemistry or biochemisry student would agree. We'll

have to see what develops.

On 1/19/07, Blau <robert-blau@... > wrote:

Very interesting article that gives some insights into the nature of

cancer cells re oxygen metabolism. It would be great if this drug could

work. Chemically, it*s very simple, structurally speaking. We shall see

.. . .

Cheap, safe drug kills most cancers

===================================

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn10971-cheap-safe-drug-kills-most-cancers.h\

tml

It sounds almost too good to be true: a cheap and simple drug that kills

almost all cancers by switching off their " immortality " . The drug,

dichloroacetate (DCA), has already been used for years to treat rare

metabolic disorders and so is known to be relatively safe.

[Guest guest]

Here's a review article on the subject. ~ Karl

Mitochondrial defects in cancer

Abstract

Mitochondria play important roles in cellular energy metabolism, free radical

generation, and apoptosis. Defects in mitochondrial function have long been

suspected to contribute to the development and progression of cancer. In this

review article, we aim to provide a brief summary of our current understanding

of mitochondrial genetics and biology, review the mtDNA alterations reported in

various types of cancer, and offer some perspective as to the emergence of mtDNA

mutations, their functional consequences in cancer development, and therapeutic

implications.

full text: http://www.molecular-cancer.com/content/1/1/9

Cheap, safe drug kills most cancers

Blank

Cheap, safe drug kills most cancers

11:58 17 January 2007

From New Scientist Print Edition.

Andy Coghlan

What makes cancer cells different - and how to kill them

It sounds almost too good to be true: a cheap and simple drug that

kills almost all cancers by switching off their " immortality " . The

drug, dichloroacetate (DCA), has already been used for years to treat

rare metabolic disorders and so is known to be relatively safe.

It also has no patent, meaning it could be manufactured for a

fraction of the cost of newly developed drugs.

Evangelos Michelakis of the University of Alberta in Edmonton,

Canada, and his colleagues tested DCA on human cells cultured outside

the body and found that it killed lung, breast and brain cancer

cells, but not healthy cells. Tumours in rats deliberately infected

with human cancer also shrank drastically when they were fed

DCA-laced water for several weeks.

DCA attacks a unique feature of cancer cells: the fact that they make

their energy throughout the main body of the cell, rather than in

distinct organelles called mitochondria. This process, called

glycolysis, is inefficient and uses up vast amounts of sugar.

Until now it had been assumed that cancer cells used glycolysis

because their mitochondria were irreparably damaged. However,

Michelakis's experiments prove this is not the case, because DCA

reawakened the mitochondria in cancer cells. The cells then withered

and died (Cancer Cell, DOI: 10.1016/j.ccr.2006.10.020).

Michelakis suggests that the switch to glycolysis as an energy source

occurs when cells in the middle of an abnormal but benign lump don't

get enough oxygen for their mitochondria to work properly. In order

to survive, they switch off their mitochondria and start producing

energy through glycolysis.

Crucially, though, mitochondria do another job in cells: they

activate apoptosis, the process by which abnormal cells

self-destruct. When cells switch mitochondria off, they become

" immortal " , outliving other cells in the tumour and so becoming

dominant. Once reawakened by DCA, mitochondria reactivate apoptosis

and order the abnormal cells to die.

" The results are intriguing because they point to a critical role

that mitochondria play: they impart a unique trait to cancer cells

that can be exploited for cancer therapy, " says Dario Altieri,

director of the University of Massachusetts Cancer Center in Worcester.

The phenomenon might also explain how secondary cancers

form. Glycolysis generates lactic acid, which can break down the

collagen matrix holding cells together. This means abnormal cells can

be released and float to other parts of the body, where they seed new tumours.

DCA can cause pain, numbness and gait disturbances in some patients,

but this may be a price worth paying if it turns out to be effective

against all cancers. The next step is to run clinical trials of DCA

in people with cancer. These may have to be funded by charities,

universities and governments: pharmaceutical companies are unlikely

to pay because they can't make money on unpatented medicines. The

pay-off is that if DCA does work, it will be easy to manufacture and

dirt cheap.

e, a cancer cell biologist at the University of Dundee in

the UK, says the findings challenge the current assumption that

mutations, not metabolism, spark off cancers. " The question is: which

comes first? " he says.

http://www.newscientist.com:80/article/dn10971?DCMP=NLC-nletter & nsref=dn10971

[Guest guest]

At 11:36 AM 1/22/07, KarlS@... wrote:

>Here's a review article on the subject. ~ Karl

>Mitochondrial defects in cancer

>Mitochondria play important roles in cellular energy metabolism,

>free radical generation, and apoptosis.

>full text:

><http://www.molecular-cancer.com/content/1/1/9>http://www.molecular-cancer.com/\

content/1/1/9

Karl, thanks for sharing this 2002 Molecular Cancer review. Its

content provides more foundation of information from which the think

about the possibilities, and problems, with DCA and molecules with a

similar mechanism(s) of action.

It is interesting that Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS), like H2O2, is

discussed in both this 2002 review and in the current DCA anti-Cancer

paper [Cancer Cell, Vol 11, 37-51, January 2007], but the two papers

invoke ROS as having 'opposite' effects on cancers.

The 2002 review attributes ROS as a cause of mutations of mtDNA,

mutations that inhibit apoptosis, and thus permit cancer cells

(including CLL cells, p.9 of review) to survive longer, enabling the cancer.

Whereas the 2007 Cancer Cell paper provides evidence that ROS is

elevated by the DCA-induced activation of pyruvate dehydrogenase (PD)

and that ROS is a key factor that permits the apoptosis of cancer

cells, thus limiting their survival.

This type of apparent conflict between two sets of experimental

results is not uncommon, and it is explainable by multiple functions

of metabolic factors (e.g. ROS), which can be promoting opposite

overall outcomes (e.g. killing or suviving cancer cells), depending

on the context of their function. For example, micro-compartments in

cells, even within organelles (e.g. mitochondria) can be doing very

different things metabolically than other micro-compartments within

the same cell/organelle. This is also true, for similar reasons, for

the human body as a whole, in which the regulation by a

molecule/factor can be very different from an endocrine, paracrine or

autocrine perspective.

This is one of the downsides of identifying a single molecule (e.g.

ROS) as 'the' mediator of the actions of another factor (e.g. DCA, or

even activation of PD), when, in fact, almost always, there are

multiple effects of those factors, the summation of which is what is

observed as an outcome (e.g. cancer cell death or cancer cell survival).

These perspectives must be especially kept in mind when optimizing

the benefits (e.g. anti-cancer) and downsides (e.g. neuro-toxicities)

of therapeutic agents (e.g. DCA), so as to optimize the overall

desirable outcome. Even then, there are important person-to-person

individual differences that can affect the overall outcome.

Al Janski

[Guest guest]

Hi all. I was just doing some research about dichloroacetate, and

some web searching, when I came across this group. I found a place

where that carries *methyl* dichloroacetate

http://www.coleparmer.com/catalog/product_view.asp?sku=8814836

and there is also another product on that site called

dichloroacetone. Now, I'm not a chemist and don't know what the

difference of these products are, but I thought that this might be a

good place to start when searching for this stuff. A search

on " chemical supply " with dichloroacetate also returns varying

results. I hope this helps.

>

> Where can anyone buy dichloroacetate? I can't find anywhere at all

on

> the internet that it's available, either as a supplement or as a

> prescription drug.

>

> Anyone have any info on where it's available?

>

> Not that anyone ought to pop off and just start taking it. But I

would

> like to see someplace that even sells it. So far, I have turned up

> nothing, maybe because it is only used to treat " rare metabolic

> disorders. "

>

[Guest guest]

Hi, Steve.

Nice going! It's not easy to find a company that sells DCA. Thanks!

A couple of things:

Anyone interested in trying DCA MUST THOROUGHLY RESEARCH IT before

going ahead with actually taking it.

There are several different kinds of dichloroacetate: There at least

3 I know of--- methyl dichloroacetate, potassium dichloroacetate and

sodium dichloroacetate. I know that usually it is the sodium form

that is most fit for human consumption. I would not go near the

methyl and would be suspicious about the potassium.

But even and certainly with the sodium dichloroacetate, I would be

very cautious. Member Dr. Wolski, as well as a biochemist I know, are

thinking it could be too acidic, and might burn one if not properly

taken. Also, there is apparently a real possibility of liver damage,

so Dr. Wolski, who has apparently obtained some DCA, is going to take

it with thiamine.

Now, with regard to locating someone who sells DCA, that is only the

first part of the battle. The second part is getting that someone to

actually sell some DCA to you. If you are not a doctor, or a

researcher, and, in the case of Sigma-Aldrich Chemical Company, which

is where I found DCA for sale, I was told that unless you actually

have a laboratory attached to the address where you want the DCA

shipped, they will not sell to you.

Along with everything else, I have read one science reporter's site

where he said he believes resveratrol, which IS readily available to

purchase, has far more cancer-killing properties than does DCA.

So I am waiting to hear how it goes with Dr. Wolksi's experiment

before I take further action trying to obtain and to take DCA. I am

in a position to wait, as I am dx'd with a slow-growing cancer that

right now appears to be in remission.

Others, who do not have such a luxury of time as I do, might

justifiably want to get and try DCA as soon as possible.

I would simply caution them to BE VERY CAREFUL, if they are able to

obtain some DCA, not to harm themselves in their attempt to cure

themselves.

> >

> > Where can anyone buy dichloroacetate? I can't find anywhere at

all

> on

> > the internet that it's available, either as a supplement or as a

> > prescription drug.

> >

> > Anyone have any info on where it's available?

> >

> > Not that anyone ought to pop off and just start taking it. But I

> would

> > like to see someplace that even sells it. So far, I have turned

up

> > nothing, maybe because it is only used to treat " rare metabolic

> > disorders. "

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Ok, something funny that I just had to share here...

Below, Breethedeepnow wrote about resveratrol. I looked it up in

Wikipedia and I am pasting part of that entry. Pay attention to the

last word in the quoted paragraph. This is copied verbatim from

Wikipedia:

" Resveratrol is found in the skin of red grapes and as a constituent

of red wine but based on extrapolation from animal trials, apparently

not in sufficient amounts to explain the " French paradox " that the

incidence of coronary heart disease is relatively low in southern

France despite high dietary intake of saturated farts. "

> > >

> > > Where can anyone buy dichloroacetate? I can't find anywhere at

> all

> > on

> > > the internet that it's available, either as a supplement or as

a

> > > prescription drug.

> > >

> > > Anyone have any info on where it's available?

> > >

> > > Not that anyone ought to pop off and just start taking it. But

I

> > would

> > > like to see someplace that even sells it. So far, I have turned

> up

> > > nothing, maybe because it is only used to treat " rare metabolic

> > > disorders. "

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

I just looked it up and it says this:

" Resveratrol is a phytoalexin produced by several plants that is sold

as a nutritional supplement. A number of beneficial health effects,

such as anti-cancer, antiviral, neuroprotective, anti-aging, anti-

inflammatory and life-prolonging effects have been reported in non-

human species (e.g. rats). Resveratrol is found in the skin of red

grapes and as a constituent of red wine but based on extrapolation

from animal trials, apparently not in sufficient amounts to explain

the " French paradox " that the incidence of coronary heart disease is

relatively low in southern France despite high dietary intake of

saturated FATS. "

> > > >

> > > > Where can anyone buy dichloroacetate? I can't find anywhere

at

> > all

> > > on

> > > > the internet that it's available, either as a supplement or

as

> a

> > > > prescription drug.

> > > >

> > > > Anyone have any info on where it's available?

> > > >

> > > > Not that anyone ought to pop off and just start taking it.

But

> I

> > > would

> > > > like to see someplace that even sells it. So far, I have

turned

> > up

> > > > nothing, maybe because it is only used to treat " rare

metabolic

> > > > disorders. "

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Ok, I believe you, and you may not believe me - but I copy/pasted

that message directly from Wikipedia. I did not change a single

keystroke. There must have been a glitch. Just thought I'd share a

brief moment of levity...

> > > > >

> > > > > Where can anyone buy dichloroacetate? I can't find anywhere

> at

> > > all

> > > > on

> > > > > the internet that it's available, either as a supplement or

> as

> > a

> > > > > prescription drug.

> > > > >

> > > > > Anyone have any info on where it's available?

> > > > >

> > > > > Not that anyone ought to pop off and just start taking it.

> But

> > I

> > > > would

> > > > > like to see someplace that even sells it. So far, I have

> turned

> > > up

> > > > > nothing, maybe because it is only used to treat " rare

> metabolic

> > > > > disorders. "

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

List,

I have seen scores of things like DCA capture the imagination of both

con guys with calculator fever and of desperate patients. These

things rarely work as hoped. The information usually is released by

those with cancer/health newsletters who distort the presentation

because they have to grandstand something exciting every month in

order to sustain readership.

A little common sense here. Any small molecule that manifests a

desirable biological effect by distorting a biochemical pathway will

also distort myriad other biochemical pathways from the

evolution-optimized homeostasis. Some binding effects might be quite

irreversible in ways that are not readily apparent. As to the

effectiveness at killing cancer, you can go through cancer research

journals and find tens of thousands of better compounds. These

things are not researched well enough to be able to determine how

sensible it would be to play around with them.

I do research these things. I never propose their use on humans

until I am very satisfied that their use is justified. I really

don't think that is the case with DCA. There are many related

halo-acetates that I would like to use but can't as of yet. For

example, I would love to use sodium fluoroacetate because it is so

cytotoxic but I have no way to target it to cancer cells

exclusively. This compound is used to kill wild dogs, ferral pigs,

rats, etc. and there is no antidote. It destroys testicles, thymus,

and hypothalamus. In animal trials symptoms of gross toxicity don't

show up until 3-20 minutes before death.

There is always an adventure-seeking portion of the population that

is fool-hardy enough to try these things. From my perspective they

are volunteering to thin the herd -- you gotta love 'em. I wish I

had a good way to keep track of these excitable boys so I could buy

term life insurance policies on them with my non-profit as the beneficiary.

Methyldichloroacetate? Non-specific esterases will immediately

hydrolyze this into an equimolar amount of methanol. The methanol

could be flushed from the body with ethanol. So, perhaps some of our

heros want to spike their zombies with it?

On the other hand, Elliot did mention the use of resveratrol. Now

that is good advice. Resveratrol is not only natural and safe but

the compound is similar in structure to many other safe compounds

with anticancer activity.

[Guest guest]

Hi, .

A couple of comments:

A biochemist I know told me that trichloroacetic acid, which is

apparently related to dichloroacetate, " precipitates cellular DNA " ---

and that it is toxic in other ways, as well.

About this:

" A little common sense here. Any small molecule that manifests a

desirable biological effect by distorting a biochemical pathway will

also distort myriad other biochemical pathways from the

evolution-optimized homeostasis. "

With regard to your use of the word " evolution: in the above

paragraph, I do not know if you are implying that you believe in the

evolution of life and of human beings or not. In case you are, I wish

to say that I certainly do not believe human bodily processes and

human body organs evolved. The human body is much too complicated for

any of it to have evolved, much less multiple bodily systems evolve

in conjunction with each other. Anyone who does believe that has

TREMENDOUS faith in chaos/mindlessness creating something so

thoroughly amazing as the human organism. I do not buy lottery

tickets because I know that every time I play, the odds are always

astronomically against me. To believe that, given enough time, a

human being could evolve is very similar to the person who keeps

buying lottery tickets thinking that each time he buys another

lottery ticket, he is getting closer to winning the lottery.

But more to the point, it was my understanding that DCA does not

distort a biochemical pathway; rather, it appears to UNdistort

whatever is causing the mitochondria to malfunction.

Forgive me if what I am saying about the lack of distortion and about

mitochondria is abysmally ignorant. I am certainly not a biochemist,

a pharmacologist or a physiologist.

I do agree with you about the dangers of self-treatment with

unfamiliar compounds. I trust Dr. Wolski is being very circumspect

about his planned use of DCA.

With regard to DCA vs resveratrol, I am not sure I mentioned it, but

the person who spoke about both in the same article is named Bill

Sardis, I believe, and he appeared to think that resveratrol would be

far MORE effective against tumors than would DCA.

I appreciate your comment about media that have to report " hot "

stories in order to sell copy.

[Guest guest]

At 04:27 PM 2/1/2007, you wrote:

> I do not buy lottery

>tickets because I know that every time I play, the odds are always

>astronomically against me. To believe that, given enough time, a

>human being could evolve is very similar as the person who keeps

>buying lottery tickets thinking that each time he buys another

>lottery ticket, he is getting closer to winning the lottery.

Elliot,

Each day a zillion things happen for which the odds are a

billion to one. Odds are meaningless after the fact. It is

absolutely meaningless to come back from the golf course and announce

that you hit holes in one on all the odd numbered holes. Exciting

day. BUT, announce in advance that you are going to go do this and

then do it, now THIS belongs in the local paper. For all I know the

human race is just one of billions of nature's failed

experiments. From my vantage point I see the human race fast

forwarding itself to just one more everyday extinction and bringing

down other species with it. In another billion years silverfish will

evolve along with cockroaches. They'll probably nuke each other for

propagating religious heresy. Unfortunately I can't foresee the

future past this last great tribulation.

[Guest guest]

Hi, .

This is too nebulous to make head nor tail of:

" Each day a zillion things happen for which the odds are a

> billion to one. Odds are meaningless after the fact. It is

> absolutely meaningless to come back from the golf course and

announce

> that you hit holes in one on all the odd numbered holes. Exciting

> day. BUT, announce in advance that you are going to go do this and

> then do it, now THIS belongs in the local paper. For all I know

the

> human race is just one of billions of nature's failed

> experiments. From my vantage point I see the human race fast

> forwarding itself to just one more everyday extinction and bringing

> down other species with it. In another billion years silverfish

will

> evolve along with cockroaches. They'll probably nuke each other

for

> propagating religious heresy. Unfortunately I can't foresee the

> future past this last great tribulation. "

Whatever the above is supposed to mean, and regardless of what it

means, this is a fact, as far as I am concerned:

To say or to believe that the human organism evolved over time is

plain ignorant. To insist on believing such a thing is WILLFULLY

ignorant.

Many secular scientists agree that it would mathematically take more

years than the universe is old for even the simplest bacterium to

evolve.

In terms of holes in one, the creation of the human organism by

evolution, without any intelligent mind behind the process is like a

hole in a hole in a hole in hole in a hole in a hole in a hole in a

hole in one times 10 to the zillionth power squared.

It just strikes me very strangely when someone of your obviously high

intelligence makes what appears to be an offhand remark about a human

biological process having evolved.

It just ain't so, . Not by a loooooooooooooooooooooo(so many

o's I could not type them all if I lived any number of trillion years)

g shot.

>

>

[Guest guest]

Regarding some of the different chemical species that have come up in

the discussion of dichloroacetate (DCA):

Dichloroacetate is related to acetate, the basic (neutralized) form of

acetic acid, which is the main component of vinegar. The acetate

molecule plays a central role in aerobic respiration in cells. It is the

starting point for the Krebs cycle, the main part of aerobic

respiration, occuring in the mitochondria.

Dichloroacetone would be totally different from dichloroacetate. It is a

ketone rather than a carboxylic acid. (Also, it has three carbons rather

than two.) It would be like using nail polish remover rather than

vinegar.

Methyl dichloroacetate would be the ester formed between dichloroacetic

acid and methyl (wood) alcohol, and thus would likely be toxic due to

the presence of the wood alcohol.

Dichloroacetic acid IS more acidic than ordinary acetic acid, but in the

(sodium or potassium) acetate form would be close to neutral, so no need

to worry about burning as from a strong acid. There shouldn't be too

much difference between the sodium and potassium form, but the sodium

would probably be a safer bet.

Trichloroacetic acid would be STILL more acidic, and in the

un-neutralized form would probably burn significantly.

As and others have pointed out, DCA, although a simple molecule,

is nothing to fool around with on your own. Hopefully, requisite

research on it and other simple molecules will be done, and some good,

low toxicity chemotherapeutic agents and approaches may come out of it.

At least one can hope. In the meantime, " don't try this at home, kids " ,

at least not without medical supervision.

Best,

RB