Notifications
Clear all

Combo Metformin And Syrosingopine!!!! Looks Awesome!

1,033 Posts
35 Users
227 Likes
83.4 K Views
(@jpizzuto)
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 215
 

@gge

Thank you for your research.

She actually prefers unripe bananas, but they don't stay that way.  🙂

From what I have read, you can't make ketones until insulin falls.  But, I know a ripe banana will spike it.  I will tell her it's working against the medication.


   
ReplyQuote
(@jpizzuto)
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 215
 

@jcancom

Say I buy the sonicator, what would be next?  Which drug should I try to make first?  Nano MG?  Is nano Chitosan used in the formulation, or is that a separate drug? List of materials?

@Daniel

Are you working with anyone doing these kinds of things?  Is it helping?

Can it really be done in a home lab?  What minimal glassware, etc should I have?  Bunsen burner?  Please email if not suitable to discuss on the forum.  🙂


   
GgE and GgE reacted
ReplyQuote
 GgE
(@gge)
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 240
 
Posted by: @jpizzuto

@Daniel

Are you working with anyone doing these kinds of things?  Is it helping?

Can it really be done in a home lab?  What minimal glassware, etc should I have?  Bunsen burner?  Please email if not suitable to discuss on the forum.  🙂

That's a great suggestion.

Daniel, could the MCS foundation produce and sell these products since they are unregulated supplements and not drugs? If you could, you would probably be the first one in the market and could make a huge impact in the world of cancer treatments. It could be a true game changer...


   
ReplyQuote
(@daniel)
Admin
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 1191
 

Dear @gge and @jpizzuto

Thank you for your questions. MCS Formulas develops only food supplements, not drugs. The EU regulations are very strict and we would like to comply with that in terms of both product development as well as claims.

In order to increase the absorption of supplements, we will always consider special formulations. We can not develop anything to treat cancer but we can develop products with increased absorption as long as no health claims are being made, which is also ethical in my view.

There are various ways to improve the absorption. At this point I am also considering cyclodextrin and I would like to check if we can use that to develop high absorption supplements. But it should be possible.

Now I am looking at the prior posts and I feel like the forum became a kitchen. I let you guys cook and I will be back when is done. I will come with the drinks ? 

Kind regards,
Daniel

 


   
ReplyQuote
(@j)
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 2160
 
Posted by: @daniel

There are various ways to improve the absorption. At this point I am also considering cyclodextrin and I would like to check if we can use that to develop high absorption supplements. But it should be possible.

Yes! Like CAVACURMIN®. I'd like some CAVAGARLIC etc!


   
ReplyQuote
 GgE
(@gge)
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 240
 
Posted by: @daniel

We can not develop anything to treat cancer but we can develop products with increased absorption as long as no health claims are being made

That should work. There are companies making and selling garlic extract, MG, taurate pills and many other products that have anti-cancer effect and this is totally legal and allowed. They cannot print on the product labels any claims of effectiveness against cancer, of course, to be in compliance.

So, if MCS were to sell nano or lipo MG, DCA or any of the many supplements effective against a variety of tumors, MCS should be alright as long as no therapeutic claims were made.

MCS might go to the extreme of not advertising in this forum the specific products that are discussed in it so that nobody could claim that the benefits were touted in these web pages. But it should be free to advertise them in its own web pages.

Dan would need to get expert advice on this subject. But if it came to be a reality, it could potentiate Daniel's impact on this field by 1,000 times and help millions more than now to win serious battles against their diseases. I'd really love to see this come to fruition.


   
ReplyQuote
 GgE
(@gge)
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 240
 
Posted by: @johan

Like CAVACURMIN®. I'd like some CAVAGARLIC

Ideally absorption would be improved but the most vital part is delivery into the tumor cells. We would need formulations that allow the active ingredients to selectively penetrate into the tumor microenvironment without being weakened by their acidic pH; enable them to penetrate the dual nature cell membranes and carry out their mission inside the cancer cells without being effluxed by the cell defenses; and when their job is finished, be eliminated without toxicity. All this without damaging normal cells and with minimal side effects.

As Jcancom has posted, all of this is possible and inexpensive with today's publicly available know-how and technology. Who will be the first one to make this available to everybody? Let us hope that Dan has the answer.


   
ReplyQuote
(@j)
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 2160
 
Posted by: @johan
Posted by: @daniel

There are various ways to improve the absorption. At this point I am also considering cyclodextrin and I would like to check if we can use that to develop high absorption supplements. But it should be possible.

Yes! Like CAVACURMIN®. I'd like some CAVAGARLIC etc!

Citrus flavor please, D ? 


   
ReplyQuote
(@jcancom)
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 625
Topic starter  

John, the article that I first quoted was for nanoMG. nanoMG is a formulation of methylglyoxal in chitosan. The approach that they describe seems somewhat behind the modern curve of the methods that use ionic gelation etc.. Sonication might only be an intermediary step to more advanced chitosan formulations that might require less (or different) equipment. 

Chitosan is the nano part of nanoMG. Chitosan forms the container for the methylglyoxal.

The low risk exposure approach to this would be to simply have a lab make it for you. Short term rental of a lab grade sonicator would be another option. The sonicator is the only obvious complicated and expensive piece of equipment that is noted in the procedure.   

Chitosan is clearly on the frontier. From what I remember others on forum have investigated nanoMG and they found that a clinical trial was expected for nanoMG, though it has never emerged. The patent has now been abandoned. This is fairly typical of many metabolic treatments. It becomes very difficult to protect the intellectual property when it is so highly reproducible by others.  

However, the potential with these formulations is substantial. One of the posters upthread noted that they were moving all treatments to liposomal formulations. The advantages are large with proper formulation. For example, you only expose the cancer cells to treatment. With syrosingopine treatment, the side effects from the treatment become dose limiting. Good formulations offer the possibility that such dose limitations could be overcome. 

These benefits are so widely recognized as compelling that there are probably hundreds of formulations with chitosan and anti-cancer drugs alone. 3-BP, gossypol, curcumin, resveratrol, carboplatin, quercetin, paracetamol ... . Some of these have quite a few versions of chitosan formulations all using slightly different approaches. This large research has been made for the very reason that it is so important to target treatments to specific cells; otherwise many side effects can result. Some of these would use a sonication approach, though many would use other variants.   

There is so many decades of research to discuss that it would be a challenge to even provide a basic summary outline of the research. Of interest is that this appears to be so well known that recently a human trial using chitosan with paracetamol was published with the intention of improving the "taste" of paracetamol?The taste?

What is surprising here is that with the 3-BP melanoma patient it was the paracetamol that had an overwhelming effect in potentiating 3-BP. The combination allowed for the LDH marker to immediately decline to 0. The patient's entire tumor metabolism stopped! That is what paractamol can achieve (with 3-BP). It is not beyond the realms of the imagination to expect that nanopara might allow other cancer patients to have similar responses to combination metabolic theory (especially those patients that might have less open MCT-1 transporters).

If nanopara reached the market, then this could have very significant implications for 3-BP. nanopara would specifically melt in the tumor environment due to the acid and allow for high concentrations to form in the tumor environment. Of interest, patients now can take high systemic doses of paracetamol which can create a range of potential side effect dangers.      

These formulations are on the frontier. There is not a great deal of certainty and much needs to be discovered. Those who are not comfortable with such exploration are best advised to leave it to others. Apparently the problem has been that no one has explored these boundaries and it is not known many many years after the original research was published whether or not a treatment with a safe natural ingredient could be over 400 times more effective in humans as a chitosan formulation than as an unformulated drug.

Other aspects of this can be discussed off thread.

 

Best Wishes, J

   

 

 

 


   
ReplyQuote
(@jpizzuto)
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 215
 

@jcancom

Oh.  I thought Nano MG was a thing.  Check please.

Talk me down off the ledge.  🙂


   
ReplyQuote
(@jcancom)
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 625
Topic starter  

I have been reading the back posts of this thread and I found the experience of adifer quite interest. adifer noted that there was a pronounced lactate response with metformin (syromet?). I am not sure if we understood the true importance of this response. If lactate levels DOUBLED with metformin treatment isn't this suggesting that there is a large effect on OXHPOS? Metformin is after all an OXPHOS subunit I inhibitor. This illustrates for me the power of lactate monitoring. Treat then monitor. Watch what happens to the biomarker after you treat. Lactate levels moved a great deal after treatment; this suggests that metformin was quite successful.

With this knowledge it would be good to step back and carefully consider how to proceed. adifer went with syrosingopine cotreatment. Yet, now that we have identified a large OXPHOS reponse, we can think of other possible metabolic interventions. For example, consider the metabolic trap. This is a two step treatment.

Step 1: Treat with OXPHOS subunit I inhibitor. Done. Increase glycolysis -->This will increase lactate production. I like these pictures! It makes communicating much easier and effective. There it is the Warburg trap.

Step 2: Ionophore. pHi down, proton pumps activated, ATP depleted.

 

This might have been one way to respond to adifer's situation. Yet, the danger here would be pushing lactosis to even a greater extreme.

 

Perhaps simply a glycolytic metronomic approach of gradually wearing down ATP levels with the metformin. This might be especially powerful at night when apparently cancer cells naturally transition to OXPHOS.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


   
ReplyQuote
 GgE
(@gge)
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 240
 
Posted by: @jcancom

adifer noted that there was a pronounced lactate response with metformin (syromet?)

Can you please re-post Adifer's post so that we understand what happened?

Also, can you please explain your plan and the pictures in a more basic, non-technical language so that we all can follow your logic?

Thanks!


   
ReplyQuote
 GgE
(@gge)
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 240
 
Posted by: @manuone

in my humble opinion this dynamic form of encapsulation offers new alternatives and especially fast and accessible to all. I think that "improving what we have" is as important as new formulations or re formulations.

Manuone, Jcancom’s nano-loading proposals are very exciting and I hope we can get some of them working soon. But your argument is appealing: It makes sense to use now the drug delivery technology that is already available to solve the problems we are facing now. I am interested in learning more. It is very generous of you sharing your experience in empty liposome encapsulation. Thanks!

Can you post here some links explaining how to use them, what options there are, what the risks are, and so on?

I have googled a little liposome encapsulation and it sounds very interesting. There are many, many questions that come to mind. You may have the answers. I apologize if you have already posted them before but, could you please explain to us:

  • How can we know if the drugs we want to encapsulate are going to damage the liposome before entering the cells, or stay un-released once inside the cell and just be effluxed, liposome and all?
  • You love honokiol. Have you lipo-encapsulated it? If so, what was the result?
  • Could metformin be lipo-encapsulated, delivered mostly to the cancer cells and thus avoid the gastro-intestinal problems and weight loss it often cause?
  • Could syrosingopine be lipo-encapsulated, delivered mostly to the cancer cells and thus avoid the blood pressure drops it usually cause?
  • How can one know if a drug molecules are too big to fit inside a liposome?
  • How can one know how much of a drug can be loaded in a quantity of empty liposomes?

 

  • You say that the stirrer encapsulates a large part of the drug. Can you guess a percentage? Is it like 70% or more like 95%?
  • Is there a big difference in terms of better results between the magnetic stirrer that you use and the expensive ones? Or are they just faster?
  • Is there any way to know how much of the drug is not encapsulated without having a lab?
  • Is there any way to remove the part of the drug that is not encapsulated? Do you need special instruments to do this?
  • If you cannot remove it, is there a way to bind or neutralize the non-encapsulated part of the drug and avoid taking, without damaging the encapsulated part?

 

  • How do the liposomes you propose to use avoid getting trapped in the liver or eaten by the mononuclear phagocyte system?
  • How do these liposomes go through the stomach acids and gut digestive fluids; get absorbed in the gut without suffering any damage; leave the blood vessels near the tumors; infiltrate the hostile tumor microenvironment, penetrate into the cancer cells interior and release the anti-cancer drugs while not causing harm to normal cells?
  • How do they reach cancer cells that are deep in big tumors, far from the blood vessels?
  • Do these liposomes contain PEG polymers?

 

  • Have you noticed any effects, good or bad since you started using them?

 

  • Did you choose Enoc Pharma because they are local to you? Do you know of equally good or even better companies in the USA?
  • You said you trust the scientist who develops these liposomes. Can you share some info about him?
  • Which of Enoc’s liposomes are you using? How much do they cost?
  • Have these liposomes been tested for safety or used in any clinical trials?
  • Can you share Internet links to papers you think are important to people who are thinking of adopting this technology, besides Enoc Pharma’s?
  • Do you know of any way to use exosomes instead as in this link https://jnanobiotechnology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12951-019-0517-8

I will probably have more questions as I learn about it. I hope this dialogue helps many people here in this forum.

Thanks!


   
ReplyQuote
(@jpizzuto)
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 215
 

That's better.  I was all set to sonicate first, ask questions later.  🙂


   
ReplyQuote
 GgE
(@gge)
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 240
 
Posted by: @jpizzuto

I was all set to sonicate first, ask questions later

What would be the drug of your choice to add to her Piqray therapy? why would you choose it?


   
ReplyQuote
(@manuone)
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 161
 

@gge

Those are great ideas that have haunted my mind for a long time ...
As Daniel says they are too risky proposals especially for a company that has just started. They would be "products" with little market share due to the lack of knowledge of the people apart from the legal problems.
But I am sure that when formulations grow large enough they could be redirected to new, novel and legally accepted formulations such as MITO formulations.
If Daniel allows me and with the help of many of you in the future I would like to fight to make it possible.


   
ReplyQuote
(@manuone)
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 161
 

@gge I am going to transfer all these questions to Enoc Pharma and this will be of great interest to all of us.


   
ReplyQuote
 GgE
(@gge)
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 240
 
Posted by: @manuone

I am going to transfer all these questions to Enoc Pharma and this will be of great interest to all of us

Thanks, we all can learn. May be you can add if the encapsulation system is the same for water soluble than for non-water soluble drugs.

As far as you are concerned, have you noticed any effects, good or bad since you started using them?


   
ReplyQuote
(@manuone)
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 161
 

@gge My knowledge is that the non-soluble ones usually give more problems. In a "homemade" way some need more time than others moving in the magnetic stirrer and it is important that the compound does not precipitate .... These procedures in a homemade way are not "controlled" in some occasions the liposomes can "break" or be too much active quantity for the amount of liposomes, I usually use 10 ml or 15 ml and I usually mix up to 300 mg of active without problems.
Indeed, this is an "urgent way" to try to "gain" bioavailability but without the necessary laboratory tests we are not certain. This scientist on some occasions, seeing only the images of the mixtures, was able to tell me if the liposomes "seemed" stable or not. I hope he answers soon and we have more formal answers


   
ReplyQuote
(@jcancom)
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 625
Topic starter  

GgE, thank you for taking a leadership role on the question of proper formulation. It is such an important topic and yet we have let it drift for years and years. We have tried on and off over a long time to potentiate a chitosan synth, though it never has. However, the benefits could be overwhelming. NanoMG is ~400 fold more potent than bare MG. It might be best not to think of it as more potent, but allowing for a 400 fold dose reduction. Nevertheless this could give therapeutic leverage not available in an unformulated version.

The path of least resistance, as you have discovered, is through Manuone's liposomes. This could be a way for those on thread to get their toes wet without committing to a $1,000 sonicator. If it is only add liposomes and stir (magnetically), then many would be comfortable doing some kitchen chemistry.

This would avoid having to a buy a new somewhat expensive piece of lab machinery every year or two to keep up with the evolving formulation technology. I suppose planned obsolescence is much of the underlying motivation behind the endless roll out of new lab toys.

Fortunately, there is a fair amount of low hanging fruit to pluck and for those who do not want to become entangled in a substantial meta-analysis of the research perhaps contacting a lab to do this would make it all so much easier.

This leaves the question of safety. Have any of these chitosan formulations ever been marketed to cancer patients? It would be nice to know what problems might arise. I would be especially interested in where in the body (besides the tumor) the chitosan might dissolve might (the mice research gave clues to this), though human clinical research would be welcome.

Considering that syromet is probably the most powerful metabolic we have encountered to date, it would be highly reassuring if this information could be determined. The concern would be that even at a 500 fold lower dose that there could be side effects as the dose might be directed to certain organs in unexpected ways.   

Moving the conversation to proper formulation could dramatically enhance results while reducing risk. Hopefully this time we will be able to achieve critical mass and finally achieve formulated treatments.       


   
GgE and GgE reacted
ReplyQuote
(@jcancom)
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 625
Topic starter  
Posted by: @adifer

The latest lactate analisys arrived. The normal lactate range is up to 19.8.

So lactate levels history one week apart is:

22 before syromet-4 days

45.2 after syromet+3 days

44.3 after syromet+10 days

40.93 after syromet+17 days

We are taking 500 mg metformin, 3 mg syro and 500 mg aspirin per day. Last weight was 23.6 Kg. I forgot to tell you guys about the aspirin.

GgE, here is adifer's report on the lactate levels. Carefully contemplating how lactate changes, given especially metformin dosing, might be helpful. We need to step back and think about this.

Lactate doubled (!!) after starting syromet. Really think about that. What would be best when starting up these combinations is to add in a drug and see what happens. Here since metformin inhibits OXPHOS subunit I, upregulating glycolysis and then leading to more lactate, and we have lactate monitoring, then metformin is the first on deck.  We treat with monotherapy metformin and we see a large lactate response. The mitochondria might be especially vulnerable (rho? That is, the mitochondria are almost non-functioning.).

We know that some cancers are like that. They are extremely glycolytic. In that instance, we need to be careful not to overdo it. In the vitamin C trials from the 1970s, some of the rho mitochondria type patients had fatal TLS responses on even minimal vitamin C treatment. If this really is a rho situation might be best to head to a hospital and have a doctor treat within a highly controlled environment. For example, it would be nice to have DCA available, frequent labs etc.. This could be a tremendous opportunity, though also would want to exercise considerable caution.   

This would be a circumstance where formulated treatments could be especially dangerous. It is possible that the reason why the formulations that we are considering have not moved forward is that they give too much treatment power. Excessively powerful treatments might have been discovered to be more trouble than they are worth. Eroding a tumor mass over a month or two might, though experience, have been accepted as the safest and most practical method to control cancer.  


   
ReplyQuote
(@jcancom)
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 625
Topic starter  

Below article was one of the first that I posted to this thread. I reread it last night and I noticed something quite interesting. It wasn't the resperine! syrosingopine has a fair number of side effects similar to resperine hypotensive, potential psychological effects. What if you could receive the anti-cancer effects without the side effects? The article below appears to suggest that this is possible. There is some other powerful chemical ingredient in wolfia that when combined with carbo that has quite large effect. A dual formulated wolfia & carbo nanoparticle?

 

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24465036/

Caboplatin and rauwolfia has major synergy in ovarian cancer

"As many studies have reported psychological and cardiovascular activities of Rau, the anticipated toxic side effects could be hypotension, cardiac toxicity, psychological effects, and gastrointestinal disturbance. However, in our extract, the compound reserpine was removed, which is the main contributor to the hypotensive effect and part of the psychological effects. Therefore, low toxicity with our extract could be expected."


   
ReplyQuote
 GgE
(@gge)
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 240
 
Posted by: @jcancom
 

“You are on the right track to think that everything should be formulated.” And

“proper formulation. It is such an important topic”

J, thanks for your kind words.

I am also very interested in the chitosan formulations as you can imagine. Actually both chito and liposomes are nano particles capable of delivering therapeutic drugs to cancer cells. The advantages of lipo are, as you said, that there is more info already available, the gear needed is less expensive for the time being, and the liposome seems to be easy to buy.

But I am not writing off chitosan by any stretch of imagination. As a matter of fact, I would really appreciate your telling us what would be, as far as you know, the easiest, most affordable, safest and readily available technology available today to load into chitosan any of the drugs discussed in this forum. I imagine ionic gelation would be the top candidate, but I don’t know anything in this field.

It would be interesting to set both vehicles chito and lipo on a side-by-side contest here so that we can all compare them, learn, and make our own opinions.

Actually, both chitos and lipos could be of great use together for the same cancer patient if he/she needed two drugs and one of them were easy to load into one of the vehicles but hard to load into the other while the other drug were the opposite.

So, would you please answer the questions I asked Manuone about liposomes but applying them to chitosan? We’d all appreciate it.

Here I have some extra questions just for you.

You posted “There are many many chitosan formulations for a wide range of chemicals” on July 19, 2020. Did you mean recipes for anyone to make chitosan formulations for many chemicals or formulations ready made with many chemicals and available to purchase?

You said "perhaps contacting a lab to do this would make it all so much easier." Do you know of any labs that would accept this type of work at reasonable prices? I called a few and they were not interested. It was not their line of work. Do you know of any chemist forums where chemists offer this type of services?

You said “Chitosan dissolves in the acid environment of the cancer cells; giving a highly targeted treatment. Check. Chitosan is positively charged so it will be magnetically attracted to cancer cells.” Can you elaborate? Is chitosan first attracted electrostatically to the cells and penetrates them, then it is dissolved? Is the intracellular acidity that dissolves the chitosan? Can the extracellular acidity dissolve the chitosan before? If chitosan gets dissolved in the acidic tumor microenvironment before it has penetrated the cancer cells, won’t its drug cargo be spilled around and thus rendered unable to penetrate the cancer cells through their protective membranes? Unless the drugs are amphiphilic.

Eager to learn more.

Thanks!


   
ReplyQuote
 GgE
(@gge)
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 240
 
Posted by: @jcancom

Caboplatin and rauwolfia has major synergy in ovarian cancer

"As many studies have reported psychological and cardiovascular activities of Rau, the anticipated toxic side effects could be hypotension, cardiac toxicity, psychological effects, and gastrointestinal disturbance. However, in our extract, the compound reserpine was removed, which is the main contributor to the hypotensive effect and part of the psychological effects. Therefore, low toxicity with our extract could be expected."

It is an interesting plant extract. Thanks!

Too bad that there seem to be no studies of its effects in humans.

One cautionary note is in order. The sponsors of this study and suppliers of the plant extract seem to be the same people.


   
ReplyQuote
(@j)
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 2160
 

Here's a good review:

Immunological and Toxicological Considerations for the Design of Liposomes
Collin T. Inglut 1 , Aaron J. Sorrin 1 , Thilinie Kuruppu 1 , Shruti Vig 1, Julia Cicalo 1,
Haroon Ahmad 2,3 and Huang-Chiao Huang 1,2,*

"While liposomes improve the pharmacokinetic profiles of therapeutics, they also redirect the
therapeutic payloads to the MPS (previously known as the reticuloendothelial system, RES), [91–93].
The MPS is a collection of phagocytic cells (e.g., progenitor, monocytes and macrophages) located
within the bone marrow, lymph nodes, spleen, and liver. The MPS is responsible for the removal of
antigens from the body, and is the main site of liposome accumulation [94,95]. Several rodent studies
have shown that Doxil accumulates within the liver and spleen (e.g., the two major organs of the
MPS [91]) to a greater extent than other organs shortly after IV injections [96–100]. In cynomolgus
monkeys, Kimelberg et al. found that liposomal encapsulation of [3H] methotrexate (MTX) caused
a 160-fold increase in [3H]MTX uptake by the spleen compared to the free-form [3H]MTX [93]. It
has been observed by many researchers that the redirection of liposomal chemotherapies to the MPS
induces toxicity and depletion of immune cells, especially the Kupffer cells in the liver [31,101–106].
To study the impact of liposomes on the phagocytic function of MPS cells in mice, Allen et al. tested
several compositions of egg PC-CHOL liposomes [101]. Injection (IV) of larger, multilamellar liposomes
(synthesized using 200–450 nm filters) significantly decreased the phagocytic index of the liver by
approximately 50% in mice, compared to using small unilamellar liposomes. The phagocytic index did
not recover until 3 weeks post-injection, and further doses of liposomal injections led to accumulation
in the spleen. Multiple injections caused a significant decrease in the phagocytic index of the spleen
and a 2.5-fold increase in the spleen weight. The function and weight of the spleen did not recover
until 8 days after the last liposome injection."

 


   
ReplyQuote
 GgE
(@gge)
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 240
 
Posted by: @johan

Injection (IV) of larger, multilamellar liposomes
(synthesized using 200–450 nm filters) significantly decreased the phagocytic index of the liver by
approximately 50% in mice, compared to using small unilamellar liposomes.

Bummer. Are these current or old design liposomes?
Can Johan, Manuone or someone find out if there are safe liposomes available?


   
ReplyQuote
(@j)
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 2160
 
Posted by: @gge
Posted by: @johan

Injection (IV) of larger, multilamellar liposomes
(synthesized using 200–450 nm filters) significantly decreased the phagocytic index of the liver by
approximately 50% in mice, compared to using small unilamellar liposomes.

Bummer. Are these current or old design liposomes?
Can Johan, Manuone or someone find out if there are safe liposomes available?

it's a recent review (2020) so I´d expect current.


   
ReplyQuote
(@jpizzuto)
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 215
 

@daniel

Daniel:  I searched "methylgyloxal cancer trials" and found this abstract from 2008:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18533369/

"A methylglyoxal-based anticancer formulation was developed and a three-phase study of treating a total number of 86 cancer patients was carried out. The results appear to be promising. Most of the cancer patients benefited greatly and a significant number of patients became free of the disease."

Is it possible to get the rest of the story for us, please?  Thank you very much.


   
ReplyQuote
(@daniel)
Admin
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 1191
 
Posted by: @jpizzuto

@daniel

Daniel:  I searched "methylgyloxal cancer trials" and found this abstract from 2008:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18533369/

"A methylglyoxal-based anticancer formulation was developed and a three-phase study of treating a total number of 86 cancer patients was carried out. The results appear to be promising. Most of the cancer patients benefited greatly and a significant number of patients became free of the disease."

Is it possible to get the rest of the story for us, please?  Thank you very much.

Hi John, there were a few studies (i think 3) behind the total of 86 patients. The major study and link to the PDF has been discussed and included in my post on Methylglyoxal https://www.cancertreatmentsresearch.com/methilglyoxal/

You should be able to find it easily and access the data.  

Kind regards,
Daniel


   
ReplyQuote
 GgE
(@gge)
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 240
 
Posted by: @jcancom

here is adifer's report on the lactate levels. Carefully contemplating how lactate changes, given especially metformin dosing, might be helpful. We need to step back and think about this.

Lactate doubled (!!) after starting syromet.

Do we know what happened to this patient clinically afterwards? Did they see a regression or any improvement? We need to know if the lactate could have risen due to a worsening of the condition. Then lactate could have gone up as more lactate was exported from larger or more numerous tumors rather than from cancer cells being killed by syromet. Couldn't it?


   
ReplyQuote
Page 29 / 35
Share: