Methylglyoxal: Large Response Rate in Very Advanced Stages


Methylglyoxal, a molecule also produce by human body, it is one of the substances with an anti cancer potential that stands out.

I am enthusiast about it because of the following facts:

  1. It has clear science behind supported by a large amount of academic research
  2. Its anti cancer potential has been already demonstrated in humans
  3. It can eradicate most cancer types
  4. Its anti cancer action was even indicated by a Nobel Prize winner in multiple publications in the prestigious magazine “Science”
  5. It is cheap
  6. Relatively easy accessible and can be administrated orally
  7. Low to no toxicity to normal cells

I will start this article with a number of major historical facts indicating the potential behind Methylglyoxal:

  • At the begging of the last century …
    Dr. William F. Koch (1885-1967) (appointed Professor of Physiology at the Detroit College of Medicine in 1914, and subsequently became Chairman of that Department) published a paper entitled “A NEW AND SUCCESSFUL TREATMENT AND DIAGNOSIS OF CANCER”. In this paper he was stating the following: “This substance when purified, taken up in water and immediately injected subcutaneously into a cancer patient, causes practically no local reaction; but instead, after about 24 hours, a very decided focal reaction takes place. Wherever the cancer tissue may be, its’ cells are killed, their ionic concentration increases, the osmotic pressure increases, they take up water, swell and disintegrate. The swelling causes pain and the absorbed, disintegrated products are oxidized causing fever.”“Those two things, focal pain and fever, constitute a reaction which lasts all the way from 6 to 48 hours, depending upon the amount of cancer tissue killed, and of course this depends upon the quantity of substance injected. Such a reaction occurs only in cancer cases and only in the presence of cancer tissue. After the cancer tissue has disappeared, no more reaction can be elicited, no matter how large an injection is given, an important diagnostic aid. The specificity of the substance for cancer is evidenced by the fact that while giving these injections in rapid succession (that is daily or every two days for a period of five weeks), a blood count will rise from 2,850,000 to 4,600,000 red cells and the haemeglobin from 37% to 82%. Thus the delicate red cells are not injured. At the same time a mass of cancer tissue, the size of a large cabbage, will entirely disappear, and all the signs and symptoms of the particular cancer will disappear with it, function return, and the patient become clinically cured.“Stomach, liver and rectal cancers clear up the quickest. Uterus cancer responds slightly more slowly. Squamous cell carcinoma responds about one-half as fast as stomach cancer.” (Ref.)With his therapy W Koch successfully treated various cancer types. Here are a few examples of successful cases;%20disp(3). There is so much to say about what happen following the success of Prof. Dr. William F. Koch, and at this link you can read all in details, but on short, unfortunately for the general health, Dr. Koch was never given the research facilities and cooperation by the medical profession he had asked for and wanted.
    Here are a few pieces of information that can give us a view on the drug used by Dr. Koch:
    – Once, Dr. Koch stated about his anti cancer substance the following: “The compound is difficult to make and it deteriorates rapidly. If I published it and quacks or unscientific men started mixing it and treating cancer with it, the results would be disastrous, not only possibly to the patients, but to the ultimate success of the treatment. Improperly mixed or administered the compound would fail to do its work.” (Ref.)
    – In another article this is what I found: It was an oxygen uptake product of some kind. The formula was O = C = C = O. According to the formula that Koch published it was a 10e-6 dilution, i.e. homeopathic formulation. He called this substance Glyoxylide (Ref.)
    – And here is another piece of info on his formula: The theory that Koch had was one in which he equated the dilution of his product to enzymes in the blood
    So, despite offers, he never made the formula for his medicine available to medical groups or drug companies, for fear they would change and pervert it.
    The substance that Koch suggested he was using was O = C = C = O, and it was considered essentially nothing by FDA. Her is a quote “The formula was O = C = C = O, which means nothing, really” (Ref.) As a result, his drug was classified as a fraud by the FDA (Ref.).
    . is stating the following about Koch’s glyoxylide: “Does Koch’s glyoxylide exist? The molecule glyoxylide has been a subject of investigation by chemists including H. Staudinger in 1913 [4] to Berson in 1986 [5]. Recently Sulzle [6] reviewed the literature and considered the theoretical possibilities for the existence of a compound like glyoxylide. He found that all efforts to prepare, isolate, or chemically identify this compound failed. His studies on the theoretical physical chemistry of glyoxylide showed that the substance described by Koch cannot exist in nature. This, along with Jenssen’s failure to find anything in Koch’s “medicine” [3], confirms the conclusion that the glyoxylide which Koch claims to have invented did not exist.” However
    … Nearly 100 years latter, during 2015, here is a headline from the scientific news: “Existence of elusive molecule confirmed after more than a century”. (Ref.) This shows how scientist at University of Arizona, USA, have discovered a small molecule with only four atoms that was “never been observed, neither as a substance nor as a transient species, despite a century-long history of attempts”. And guess what was the molecule discovered? That was exactly O = C = C = O (OCCO), the same that dr. Koch was suggesting he was using to treat cancer and FDA was saying that it doesn’t exist :). This simple molecule was so hard to find because it splits into two carbon monoxide (CO) fragments after half a nanosecond or so of existence. The discovery was made in Sanov’s lab, when his graduate students were experimenting with glyoxal – a chemical compound with the formula OCHCHO. (Ref.). So Koch’s OCCO precursor is actually glyoxal. OCCO is now called ethylenedione. The relation between Koch’s work and Glyoxal is also shortly discussed here.
    This proves the fact that if you don’t see it doesn’t mean automatically that it doesn’t exist. It also means, quackwatch and FDA were wrong and need to update their statements on the above.
    Therefore, Koch succeeded to find a way to synthesizing OCCO and keep it stable somehow until giving it to the patient or use substances that would trigger its production in the human body (Ref.), and with this cure cancer and other diseases. For more information on Koch’s story please see, a site maintained by the Koch family.
  • In the middle of the last century …
    Dr. Albert Szent-Gyorgyi
    was the Nobel Laureate in Medicine in 1937 for the isolation and discovery of Vitamin C. (Ref.) he also discovered Iso-Flavones and vitamin P. In his last 40 years, he researched the regulatory processes of cell growth, and thereby the regulation of cancer itself.
    As early as 1958, Szent-Györgyi also worked on Methylglyoxal and together with his collaborators, in their pioneering work on the biological role of Methylglyoxal, had put forward strong evidences for the anti-cancer and tumor growth inhibitory effect of Methylglyoxal. For example, they showed that Methylglyoxal could completely inhibit the tumor development in mice. Here is the ‘Science’ paper published in 1968: Cancerostatic Action of Methylglyoxal.
    Even earlier than that, in 1963, the prestigious magazine ‘Science’ published a remarkable article about his research. In it Dr. Szent-Gyorgyi identified two substances, one called Retine, which inhibited cancer growth (ascites tumors), and the other called Promine, which promoted cell growth and made cancer grow faster. (Ref.) He suggested that these were very small molecules that were highly potent in controlling cell division. His research using mice achieved shrinkage of tumors by increasing the ratio of Retine to Promine with daily injections of Retine. Other researchers obtained similar results and there were no harmful or toxic side effects.
    In another article in Science he announced that they have succeeded to extract Retine from human urine. (Ref.) I find this interesting since urine therapy as an anticancer approach was/is a technique used by some. And here is another article referring to glyoxal offering a hopeful target in the search for cancerostatic substances (Ref.) and more on his view on methylglyoxal (Ref.) In 1967 he announced that his laboratory had isolated and manufactured Retine (retards cell growth) in the form of a Carbonyl compound called Methylglyoxal. (Ref.)
    In an interview in Prevention magazine in 1972 conducted by Jane Kinderlehrer, he explained that he and “Dr. Egyud have found that retine (methylglyoxal) stops the growth of cancer cells without poisoning other cells. When retine is present in sufficient concentration, no cell division can occur while vital cellular processes go on unhindered. And what is a good bit of luck, and not my cleverness, the white-haired scientist pointed out, is that if a cancer cell cannot grow, it dies by itself.” According to the researchers, retine is normally produced by the body and, when it is, it prevents the growth of existing cancer cells. But the body can lose its ability to produce this substance… “Putting the retine back in the body, just as we put insulin back into a diabetics body, can stop the growth of cancer… ” (Ref.)
    Dr. Szent-Gyorgyi acknowledged the work of Dr. William Koch on the same subject saying, “A decade ago, a very intuitive researcher, Dr. William F. Koch, came to the same conclusion about the possible importance of Carbonyls in regulation of cell division and carcinostasis.”
  • At the end of the last century and beginning of our century …
    About 50 years latter Prof. dr. Manju Ray, a very good Indian scientist in Molecular Enzymology and Cancer Biochemistry, build on Methyloglyoxal’s anti cancer effects. In a series of papers, she further demonstrated the potential of Methyloglyoxal. But she did not stop to the theory. Instead she trialed the drug on 19 patients with very advanced stages of cancer and resulted in an overall cure rate of 70 percent in cancer patients who were diagnosed as terminally ill, results presented in 2001.
    In 2006 Prof. Dr. Manju Ray, presented a 5 year follow-up phase II study with methylglyoxal. It showed that of the 46 patients enrolled, 18 were in complete remission (so there were no tumors in clinical scans to see). The follow-up after 5 years of the patients took an average of 4 to 56 months. The results of the study showed that 18 (39%) patients achieved a complete remission, 18 (39%) patients had partial regression and / or stable disease, while 8 (17%) patients had progression of their disease.” After this, another successful clinical trial was conducted (see below).
    With all these results in humans, Prof. Ray clearly underpinned the great anticancer effect of Methylglyoxal.

Other facts:

  • Methylglyoxal can also enable or increase the effectiveness of DNA disrupting chemo therapy (Ref.).
  • Ketogenic Diet seems to also increase intracellular Methylglyoxal (Ref.)
  • Methylglyoxal can be also found in Manuka Honey in concentration of about 250mg/kg and it is jar of honey with honeycomb on wooden tablebelieved to be responsible for the antibacterial and antiviral activity of the honey. (Ref.) Professor Thomas Henle of University of Dresden, Germany announced in 2008 that research “unambiguously demonstrates for the first time that Methylglyoxal is directly responsible for the antibacterial activity of Manuka honey.”
  • However, note that while the amount of Methylglyoxal  present in the honey (250mg/kg) may serve as a good preventive measure,  for cancer treatment purpose this is too little. Given the Methylglyoxal  dose that is proposed to cure cancer (see the Dose and Administration section below), we would need to eat kilograms of honey each day, which is not feasible. This is why, as it will be further discussed, other sources of Methylglyoxal  are used in the clinical trails.

Other interesting articles to read:

In conclusion, the anticancer effect of methylglyoxal has been known for a long time. But relatively recent work has shown that it acts exclusively against malignant cellular mitochondrial complex I and GAPDH to elicit its anticancer effect. It has been used on humans and found that

  • methylglyoxal is potentially safe for human consumption and able to destroy cancer cells in vivo
  • a methylglyoxal-based anticancer formulation was administered orally to diverse groups of cancer patients in India
  • In first group (14 months, January 2000-February 2001) 24 patients were recruited and complete remission was observed for 11 patients and partial remission for 5 patients.
  • In the second group (60 months, October 2000-September 2005) 46 patients were recruited and complete remission was observed for 18 patients and partial remission for 18 patients.
  • In the third group (42 months, May 2005-October 2008) of the 23 patients complete remission was observed for 11 patients and partial remission for 7 patients.
  • The treatment was found to be especially effective for adenocarcinoma of urinary bladder, breast, uterus, esophageal and gastrointestinal tract cancer.
  • Several vital biochemical, radiological and other parameters were tested in patients who received treatment for a long time to assess the possible long term toxicity of methylglyoxal treatment, if any, and the results implicated no toxicity as per the parameter studied.
  • All the results showed great promise of methylglyoxal treatment and demands further improvisation the methylglyoxal based therapeutics. (Ref.)
  • Due to its mechanims of action it could complement anticancer strategies involving Chemo, 3BP, DCA, Artemisinin, and any other pro oxidant drug.

Methylglyoxal as anti cancer treatment in Humans: Clinical trials

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. Contrary to the effect of existing anticancer drugs, this methylglyoxal-based formulation is devoid of any toxic effect and reasonably effective against a wide variety of cancers. (Ref.)

Here are the result from one of the study 46 patients:

Previous in vitro and in vivo studies had shown remarkable anticancer effect of methylglyoxal. A recent toxicological study with four different species of animals has shown that methylglyoxal is potentially safe for human consumption (Ghosh et al, 2006). We have developed an anticancer formulation with methylglyoxal as the principal ingredient. To test the efficacy of this formulation, 46 patients suffering from different types of malignancies in different stages of the disease were randomly chosen: brain –2, head and neck –2, gastrointestinal –11, lung –6, gynecological –6, breast –3, urological –4, hematological –2, prostate –2, gall bladder –1, pancreas –2, others –5. The effect of the formulation on overall survival, regression of the tumours and general well being of the patients were analyzed. The follow-up of the patients ranged from 4–56 months. The results of the study show that 18 (39%) patients had complete remission, 18 (39%) patients had partial regression and/or stable disease condition, whereas 8 (17%) patients had progressive disease. In addition to the measurable improvement of the majority of the patients there was remarkable improvement in the quality of life of nearly all the patients. There was no significant adverse side effect in almost all the patients. The significant antitumour effect of methylglyoxal against a wide variety of cancer suggests that all the different types of cancer may have common altered site(s). Our next task will be to further improve this treatment and to evaluate its efficacy with a large number of patients.,%20205-222.html

Clearly, the results are great as they indicate 78% response rate, including 39% complete remission.

Anecdotal stories

  • a patient in the Netherlands keeping his cancer under control from 2001 to 2005 with MG. Doctors recognizing the patient would not be there in 2005 without MG (Ref.)


Methylglyoxal (MG) is a highly reactive dicarbonyl compound and a potent glycating agent, mainly generated as a by-product of glycolysis through a spontaneous degradation of triosephosphates. In cancer, since the glycolytic pathways is highly active there is a lot of Methylglyoxal being produced. That is even more during the administration of DNA disrupting agents such as some of chemotheraphies (see next paragraph). Figure below shows how Methylglyoxal is produced inside the cell.

Figure is from: Analysis of methylglyoxal metabolism in CHO cells grown in culture

MethylglyoxalThe cellular response to antitumour drugs that modified DNA or disrupt DNA metabolism is to activate processes of DNA repair, including poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase. This depletes cells of NAD+ such that glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase activity is depleted and triosephosphates, glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate and dihydroxyacetonephosphate, increase. Methylglyoxal is formed mainly by triosephosphate degradation and since triosephosphates is increased strongly during the DNA repair, a consequent dramatic increase in methylglyoxal formation is expected. The increase of methylglyoxal will be negative for cancer cell potentiating for example the cytotoxic effect of the antitumour agents. As a result, to block methylglyoxal, the cancer cell will over express of Glo1 (Ref.)

Indeed, it has been shown that in mammalian cells, MG is detoxified by the glyoxalase system, an enzymatic pathway consisting of two enzymes called glyoxalase 1 (Glo-1) and glyoxalase 2 (Glo-2) and is based on reduced glutathione (GSH). It has been shown that Glo-1 expression and activity is increased in many human cancer types such as colon, prostate, melanoma, lung, and breast and that Glo-1 overexpression is correlated with cancer progression and drug resistance (Ref.).

Accumulation of Methylglyoxal in cancer cells are known to lead to the inhibition of Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) (Ref1Ref2, Ref3), an essential enzyme acting in the glycolsisis pathway. GAPDH inhibition depletes ATP profoundly depriving the cancer cells of energy. Note that 3-bromopyruvate (3BP) is also inhibiting (GAPDH) (Ref1., Ref2.).

Next to GAPDH inhibition, Methylglyoxal induces mitochondria-dependent apoptosis

One of the potential anticancer mechanisms of MG may be related to GABA A receptor. This is because MG seems to be an activator of GABA A receptor (Ref.). And GABA is known to show anti cancer activity via the GABA A receptor (Ref.1, Ref.2).

As a side note the activation of GABA A receptor triggers an influx of Cl- ions (Ref.).

Dose and Administration:

MG oral administration:

According to the clinical trial above (Ref.):

  • 30mg methylglyoxal/kg of body weight/day
  • this was divided in 4 administration/day  (i.e. 7.5mg/kg/administration)
  • each dose was followed by a tablet of chewable vitamin C containing 400 mg of sodium ascorbate
  • Taking the drug on an empty stomach is NOT recommended
  • Each patient also received orally a mixture of the B vitamins twice a day: B15mg, B6 2.5 mg, B12 5 mg and B5 7.5 mg. This mixture is usually a standard composition of vitamin B complex available
  • The duration of treatment at the same or at a reduced dose was determined by evaluating the response and general condition of the patient

Now here is how to translate the above dose into what the chemical suppliers are selling:

  • Sigma and others provide 40% MG concentration in water
  • The density of MG is 1.17g/ml at 25C; this means that each ml of 40% MG contains 468mg MG
  • Since the dose suggested for a day is 30mg/kg, a person of 50kg will need 1500mg MG/day
  • Since each ml of 40% MG contains 468mg MG, the 50kg patient would need 3.2ml of 40% MG each day
  • As a result 0.8ml of 40%MG has to be administrated 4x/day
  • As suggested in the clinical trial, each of the 0.8ml will be administrated with 60ml water (i.e. in a small glass of water) after meal

Note: in addition to Vitamin B and Vitamin C suggested in the clinical trial I would also add Curcumin capsules (8g/day or lower if this is not possible) to inhibit glyoxalase 1 and possibly increase the effectiveness of MG treatment. Here is a patent that is suggesting the same

15.05.2016: Update on formulation and dose: I was just informed by one of the readers in contact with dr. Ray that in case of very aggressive cancers she is now suggesting 40mg/kg/day dose. Here is a quote of the info I received: “40 mg/Kg/day. 5 ml of her formulations has to be taken with half a cup of water/fruit juice after meal/snack four times a day, followed by one 500 mg chew-able Vitamin C (2000 mg daily total), and two tablet Polybion after lunch and dinner.

23.05.2016: Update on formulation, dose and administration following conversation with Prof. Manju Ray:

  • Methylglyoxal (MG) used is available commercially as 40% aqueous solution
  • We now use 40 mg/kg/day in four divided doses
  • For example a person of 50 kg will need 2000 mg MG in four divided
  • 40% methylglyoxal means 40 gm/100 ml (irrespective of density)
  • Take 100 ml of 40% solution, add 300 ml of water (preferably distilled water)
  • Total vol of diluted solution is 400 ml
  • 400 ml contains 40000 mg,
  • so a person of 50kg that needs 2000 mg/day will use 20ml of this diluted solution every day, in 4 devided doses, each of 5ml
  • Mix 5 ml of diluted solution with 50-75 ml of water or fruit juice and give the patient to drink
  • Such a dose should be given 4 times daily in 5-6 hrs intervals
  • After each dose of methylglyoxal,  1 tab of chewable Vit C = 500 mg should  be chewed (not swallow)
  • tablet of Polybion after lunch and dinner is OK
  • Curcumin is OK
  • My addition: Creatine supplement is a must 30-60 min prior to MG administration (see below why)
When reading the patent on Methylglyoxal I found the following statement:
“Moreover, it was observed that creatine present in cardiac cells completely protected the animal from any possible deleterious effect of methylglyoxal treatment on cardiac mitochondria (Sinha Roy et al., 2003).” Also another similar statement is here: “Furthermore, creatine can protect cardiac mitochondria from the deleterious effects of some anticancer compounds”
Although in the clinical studies they did not used Creatine, following these statements, I would clearly make sure that (maybe 30-60 minutes) prior to each MG administration there is a Creatine supplement administer too.
Next to supporting MG treatment Creatine alone seems to have both anti cancer and anti cachexia effects (Ref.)
Update on 21-June-2016:

MG IV administration:

Based on recent discussions with prof Manju Ray here is a dose that makes sense:

– 10mg/Kg MG body weight/day (sterilized with a 0.2um sterile filter as discussed in other posts on this website)
– divide this in two administrations and administer each in 12 hours interval (e.g. one to start at 9:00 a.m. and the other to start at 9:00 p.m.)
– each administration contains 5mg/kg in 250ml NaCl and is given in 3 hours
Update 22-June-2016:

Koch formulations administration:

“A successful product if taken sublingually will be tasteless at first. Then within a few minutes a slightly astringent (cotton mouth) feeling will be experienced followed by a metallic taste. Many will go on to experience a transient warm flushed feeling several minutes later, and/or feelings of increased pep and mental alertness. Those subjects having allergic symptoms will usually experience relief within a few minutes. If one or more of the above occur, the product should be considered good. The product need not be injected, but can be administered sublingually or by aerosol.”

Koch formulations are:

It is recommended to be given

  • 1 Vial per day for 10 days- then –
  • 1 Vial per week for 10 weeks- then –
  • 1 Vial per month for the balance or until vials are gone. (Ref.)

Other sources are suggesting

  • 1 Vial each day during 14 days

Regardless of the approach, the Vials are alternated, e.g. first day one vial Rhodizonsaure, second day one vial Carbonylgruppen, next day again one vial Rhodizonsaure and so on. (Ref.)

In acute conditions 1-3 times daily 1 ampoule (of 2ml) injected intramuscularly (im) or subcutaneously (sc). (Ref.) The vial can be administrated sublingual but is is preferred via injection, i.m. or s.c.

More about the therapy in German: (use google translator to translate)

Chitosan formulation:

Here is an e-mail I received from a friend from Cancer Compass (Jcancom) on a new formulation:

Dear Daniel:

An even more recent patent that you sent me was using at most 0.5mg/kg/day methylglyoxal in a chitosan encapsulation. This would be even better. The instructions they give seem easy to do. I wonder whether this formulation could be bought somewhere?


Here are a few articles on the same MG-chitosan combination:

I will soon have a look at the encapsulation of MG with chitosan since this is probably a much better route of administration, and chitosan is available and cheap. As soon as I have news on this I will update the page.

Synergy and Antagonism:

Creatine: New paper published in 2016 from dr. Roy, suggesting Creatine as supporting MG treatment: These data strongly suggest that creatine supplementation may gain importance as a safe and effective supplement in therapeutic intervention with the anti-cancer agent MG.

Glyoxalase I inhibitors: inhibition of GLO1 leads to the intracellular accumulation of methylglyoxal. The natural extracts Naringin (Ref.) and Curcumin (Ref.) are known to act as GLO1 inhibitors.

Nrf2 I inhibitors: Besides GLO1, Nrf2 favour the survival of cancer cells by protecting them from excessive dicarbonyl and/or oxidative stress (Ref.) Nrf2 is often referred to as the main activator of cellular antioxidant response but it is also the main regulator of GLO1 and AKRs expression thus playing a central role in cell response to MG stress. Nrf2 inhibitors are discussed here (Ref.) and include Ascorbic Acid.

Ascorbic acid

One of the potential anticancer mechanisms of MG may be related to GABA A receptor. This is because MG seems to be an activator of GABA A receptor (Ref.). And GABA is known to show anti cancer activity via the GABA A receptor (Ref.1, Ref.2). Therefore, combining MG treatment with GABA supplementation may increase the chance for a successful treatment. GABA is a commercially available supplement.

Dichloroacetate (DCA):
MG triggers GABA A receptor activation which in turn triggers an influx of Cl- ions (Ref.).  Intracellular Cl- on the other hand is expected to reduce DCA’s anti cancer activity as it will reduce the efficiency of the DCA-induced GSTZ1 inactivation process (Ref.). As a result, I would not combine MG with DCA.

Update 10-March-2017: Metformin:
A great anti cancer drug, accessible and low/no side effects, but according to this article, unfortunately, Metformin may increase the Glo1 activity and as a result reduce MG effectiveness. Thus, Metformin should not be combined with MG:


Based on an anecdotal report, a patient receiving MG got seven / eight weeks after he started with the methylglyoxal high fever, (41degrees). He stopped for one week MG and started again with no other issues. (Ref.)

Overall, the potential beneficial effects of methylglyoxal far outweigh its possible toxic role in vivo, and it should be utilized for the benefit of suffering humanity. (Ref.)

When reading the patent on Methylglyoxal I found the following statement:
“Moreover, it was observed that creatine present in cardiac cells completely protected the animal from any possible deleterious effect of methylglyoxal treatment on cardiac mitochondria (Sinha Roy et al., 2003).” Also another similar statement is here: “Furthermore, creatine can protect cardiac mitochondria from the deleterious effects of some anticancer compounds”
Although in the clinical studies they did not used Creatine, following these statements, I would clearly make sure that (maybe 30-60 minutes) prior to each MG administration there is a Creatine supplement administer too.

MG preparation:
Methylglyoxal can be bought from Western or Chinese chemical suppliers under CAS number 78-98-8. It is usually found as 40% Methylglyoxal in water solution. Here is an example of a supplier:

MG Clinics and Hospitals:
The Indian hospital from enclosed reference (Ref.) was still running clinical trials in May 2016. Patients can access MG at the following address in India: Lokmanya Medical Research Centre, Chinchwad, Pune 411 033

It seems that a Mexican clinic at Providence Pacific Hospital administered methylglyoxal to humans at the begging of 2000 but I can not find more info on that.

Methylglyoxal, also called pyruvaldehyde or 2-oxo-propanal (CH3-CO-CH=O or C3H4O2) is the aldehyde form of pyruvic acid.

Update on 21-June-2016:

Prof Koch’s formulation:

Yesterday, I was informed by a friend from Cancer Compass (thank you Jet) that various sources of information indicate that Dr. Koch shared his homeopathic data and formulas with a Dr. Eric Reinstorff in Germany (now deceased).  But that Dr. Dieter Reinstorff in Hamburg, Germany (Eric’s son) is still manufacturing, distributing it, and using Koch’s homeopathic reagents.

Indeed, here is an interview (from 2005, in German) with Dr. Reinstorff referring to his work with Prof. Koch. As a result, he started up a small pharma company („REIKO“ Pharma Vertriebsgesellschaft GmbH, „REIKO“ comes from Reinstorff-Koch) owning 3 different products based on Koch’s formulations: Carbonylgruppen, Rhodizonsäure, Parabenzochinon. The products seems to be manufactured by Adjupharm GmbH in Germany while being advertised at the following website The products are available at most German pharmacies without prescription:

In USA, it seems that the above vials are available too but 10 vials would cost 300$


In vivo assessment of toxicity and pharmacokinetics of methylglyoxal 

A pharmaceutical composition and treatment method to reduce the proliferation of cancerous or tumor cells, in which the combined active agents are methylglyoxal, ascorbic acid, creatine and melatonin.

Oral formulation of methylglyoxal and its imino acid conjugates for human use

The invention relates to an oral formulation of methylglyoxal and/or its imino acid conjugates for human use and methods for preparing the compositions. Particularly, the invention relates to compositions comprising methylglyoxal and more particularly, imino acid conjugates of methylglyoxal. The present invention also relates to formulations of methylglyoxal and imino acid conjugates of methylglyoxal that can be used for the treatment and suppression of malignant diseases including but not limited to the cancers of Colon, Prostate, Pancreas, Lung, Oral cavity, Glioblastoma, and Leukemia.

Sustained release formulations containing methylglyoxal and their therapeutic applications

A novel nano drug composition for the treatment of cancer comprising 0.125-0.5 mg of methylglyoxal as conjugated to nanoparticles of chitosan, its derivatives, or other polymers; 25-100 mg of ascorbic acid; 75-300 mg of creatine; and 0.125-0.5mg of melatonin, wherein all constituents are meant for each kg of body weight.

Treatment of cancer by oxidation-reduction potentiation of cancerostatic dicarbonyls

A novel treatment regimen is described for the control and elimination of cancer cell populations including cancer stem cells. The disclosed protocol consists of a pretreatment step followed by a treatment step. The pretreatment step sensitizes cancer cells to apoptosis by altering their intracellular oxidation-reduction state via reduced glutathione depletion. The treatment step involves the sequential administration of a cancerostatic dicarbonyl compound to induce apoptosis. The use of nanoparticle delivery systems further enhances both the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of the pretreatment compounds and the cancerostatic dicarbonyls. Since the pretreatment and treatment compounds are carefully selected and delivered, normal cells are not affected and side effects are kept to a minimum.


Protein and nucleotide damage by glyoxal and methylglyoxal in physiological systems – role in ageing and disease

Glycation of proteins, nucleotides and basic phospholipids by glyoxal and methylglyoxal – physiological substrates of glyoxalase 1 – is potentially damaging to the proteome, genome and lipidome. Glyoxalase 1 suppresses glycation by these α-oxoaldehyde metabolites and thereby represents part of the enzymatic defence against glycation. Albert Szent-Gyorgyi pioneered and struggled to understand the physiological function of methylglyoxal and the glyoxalase system. We now appreciate glyoxalase 1 protects against dicarbonyl modifications of the proteome, genome and lipome. Latest research suggests there are functional modifications of this process – implying a role in cell signalling, ageing and disease.

Methylglyoxal enhances cisplatin-induced cytotoxicity by activating protein kinase Cdelta

Importantly, co-treatment of cells with the reactive carbonyl MGO and cisplatin increased apoptosis by 90% over the expected additive effect of combined MGO and cisplatin treatment. This same synergism was also observed when ROS generation was examined. MGO and cisplatin increased PKCdelta activity by 4-fold

Effects of methylglyoxal and glyoxalase I inhibition on breast cancer cells proliferation, invasion, and apoptosis through modulation of MAPKs, MMP9, and Bcl-2.

Collectively, these data indicate that MG or inhibition of GLOI induces anticancer effects in breast cancer cells and that these effects are potentiated by combination of the 2.

Triple negative tumors accumulate significantly less methylglyoxal specific adducts than other human breast cancer subtypes

Interestingly, the activity of glyoxalase 1 (Glo-1), an enzyme that detoxifies MG, was significantly higher in triple negative than in other subtype lesions, suggesting that these aggressive tumors are able to develop an efficient response against dicarbonyl stress. Using breast cancer cell lines, we substantiated these clinical observations by showing that, in contrast to triple positive, triple negative cells induced Glo-1 expression and activity in response to MG treatment.

Inactivation of glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase of human malignant cells by methylglyoxal.

The effect of methylglyoxal on the activity of glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GA3PD) of several normal human tissues and benign and malignant tumors has been tested. Methylglyoxal inactivated GA3PD of all the malignant cells (47 samples) and the degree of inactivation was in the range of 25-90%, but it had no inhibitory effect on this enzyme from several normal cells (24 samples) and benign tumors (13 samples). When the effect of methylglyoxal on other two dehydrogenases namely glucose 6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) and L-lactic dehydrogenase (LDH) of similar cells was tested as controls it has been observed that methylglyoxal has some inactivating effect on G6PD of all the normal, benign and malignant samples tested, whereas, LDH remained completely unaffected. These studies indicate that the inactivating effect of methylglyoxal on GA3PD specifically of the malignant cells may be a common feature of all the malignant cells, and this phenomenon can be used as a simple and rapid device for the detection of malignancy.

Nanofabrication of methylglyoxal with chitosan biopolymer: a potential tool for enhancement of its anticancer effect

Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy revealed the presence of imine groups in Nano-MG due to conjugation of the amino group of chitosan and carbonyl group of MG with diameters of nanoparticles ranging from 50-100 nm. The zeta potential of Nano-MG was +21 mV and they contained approximately 100 μg of MG in 1 mL of solution. In vitro studies with Nano-MG showed higher cytotoxicity and enhanced rate of apoptosis in the HBL-100 cell line in comparison with bare MG, but no detrimental effect on normal mouse myoblast cell line C2C12 at the concerned doses. Studies with EAC cells also showed increased cell death of nearly 1.5 times. Nano-MG had similar cytotoxic effects on A549 cells. In vivo studies further demonstrated the efficacy of Nano-MG over bare MG and found them to be about 400 times more potent in EAC-bearing mice and nearly 80 times more effective in sarcoma-180-bearing mice. Administration of ascorbic acid and creatine during in vivo treatments augmented the anticancer effect of Nano-MG.

Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase: a promising target for molecular therapy in hepatocellular carcinoma.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most highly lethal malignancies ranking as the third leading-cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Although surgical resection and transplantation are effective curative therapies, very few patients qualify for such treatments due to the advanced stage of the disease at diagnosis. In this context, loco-regional therapies provide a viable therapeutic alternative with minimal systemic toxicity. However, as chemoresistance and tumor recurrence negatively impact the success of therapy resulting in poorer patient outcomes it is imperative to identify new molecular target(s) in cancer cells that could be effectively targeted by novel agents. Recent research has demonstrated that proliferation in HCC is associated with increased glucose metabolism. The glycolytic enzyme, glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH), a multifunctional protein primarily recognized for its role in glucose metabolism, has already been shown to affect the proliferative potential of cancer cells. In human HCC, the increased expression of GAPDH is invariably associated with enhanced glycolytic capacity facilitating tumor progression. Though it is not yet known whether GAPDH up-regulation contributes to tumorigenesis sensu stricto, emerging evidence points to the existence of a link between GAPDH up-regulation and the promotion of survival mechanisms in cancer cells as well as chemoresistance. The involvement of GAPDH in several hepatocarcinogenic mechanisms (e.g. viral hepatitis, metabolic alterations) and its sensitivity to a new class of prospective anticancer agents prompted us to review the current understanding of the therapeutic potential of targeting GAPDH in HCC.

Anti-Cancer Strategies of Methylglyoxal

Methylglyoxal a simple carbonyl compound containing a reactive aldehyde and a ketonic group which stops the growth of cancer cells without poisoning normal cells. It is also called as Retine. These are very small molecules that are highly potent in controlling cell division. This compound inhibits the enzymes required for cancer cell and infected cell to grow by respiration and does not harm normal cells. As cancer cells require large amount of energy to multiply which was provided by ATP. Methylglyoxal inactivates the enzyme Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate Dehydrogenase (GA3PD) needed for the ATP production in cancer cells and there by starves the cell to death and normal cells remain unaffected. As it is a carbonyl group, it inhibits the mitochondrial respiration followed by Glycolysis and Kreb’s cycle which play a major role in the production of ATP and supplies the energy to infected cell up to demand. It also play a role in binding of oxygen at cellular level and preventing the proteins to desaturate and inhibits the production of free radicals. Hence suitable energy and oxygen are unavailable to cancerous cell to grow, leading to death of the cell. It was believed that “If cancer cell cannot grow, it dies by itself”. It desaturate the proteins of malignant cell at cellular level by means of its ketoaldehyde group with an aminoacid of a protein causing the death of cell

The results clearly indicate that Nano-MG may constitute a promising tool in anticancer therapeutics in the near future.

Cancerostatic Action of Methylglyoxal

Creatine supplementation with methylglyoxal: a potent therapy for cancer in experimental models.

In conclusion, it may be stated that the anti-cancer effect of MG is enhanced by concomitant creatine supplementation, both in chemically transformed (by 3MC) muscle cells in vitro as well as in sarcoma animal model in vivo. These data strongly suggest that creatine supplementation may gain importance as a safe and effective supplement in therapeutic intervention with the anti-cancer agent MG.

Curcumin inhibits glyoxalase 1: a possible link to its anti-inflammatory and anti-tumor activity.

The results described herein provide new insights into curcumin‘s biological activities as they indicate that inhibition of Glo1 by curcumin may result in non-tolerable levels of MGO and GSH, which, in turn, modulate various metabolic cellular pathways including depletion of cellular ATP and GSH content. This may account for curcumin‘s potency as an anti-inflammatory and anti-tumor agent. The findings support the use of curcumin as a potential therapeutic agent.

Curcumin inhibits advanced glycation end product-induced oxidative stress and inflammatory responses in endothelial cell damage via trapping methylglyoxal

Methylglyoxal (MGO) inhibits proliferation and induces cell death of human glioblastoma multiforme T98G and U87MG cells

We have also revealed that MGO induces senescence of U87MG but not T98G cells, but further studies are necessary in order to clarify and check mechanism of action of methylglyoxal and it Is a positive phenomenon for the treatment of GBM.

A novel mechanism of methylglyoxal cytotoxicity in prostate cancer cells.

The results suggest that this physiological compound merits investigation as a potential chemo-preventive/-therapeutic agent, in differently aggressive prostate cancers.


This site is not designed to and does not provide medical advice, professional diagnosis, opinion, treatment or services to you or to any other individual. Through this site and linkages to other sites, I provide general information for educational purposes only. The information provided in this site, or through linkages to other sites, is not a substitute for medical or professional care, and you should not use the information in place of a visit, call consultation or the advice of your physician or other healthcare provider. I am not liable or responsible for any advice, course of treatment, diagnosis or any other information, services or product you obtain through this site. This is just my own personal opinion regarding what we have learned on this road.

Related Articles

185 thoughts on “Methylglyoxal: Large Response Rate in Very Advanced Stages

    1. Very interesting and relevant Pouya! Thank you for the reference!
      Indeed, this would indicate that while Metformin is well known anti cancer drug, one that I like a lot due to its potential, accessibility and low side chance for effects, it should not be used when on MG.

    2. Hi Pouya,
      It is very nice to see you here and see you strong.
      May be you dont believe but i am always thinking of you.
      If we have projects later,it is MUST to see you near us.

      1. Hi dear Ergin,
        thanks for your kind words, I have seen you mentioning me in other posts and I believe you and I appreciate that a lot.
        I usually go to sleep wishing that I won’t wake up the next day but since I keep waking up and cancer is still all I can think of from day to night, I figured I make myself useful and participate in the fight and yes, I also so wish to meet you guys in person and give you the warmest hug ever and I’m willing to make it happen.wish you the best though your fight. I’ll be here and help as much as I can.

    1. Dear Pouya,

      I checked the subject and here is a review indicating it is not clear if that is true in general.
      It seems to be mostly true for the combination of Creatine and exercise
      Probably, most of the glucose will actually go to the muscles during the exercise.

      Besides this, I think you once suggested we should have a place where people can generate new ideas outside the posts I published. I think that is a good idea. Can you please let me know if you have more details on how you imagine that? Thank you.

      Kind regards,

  1. Thanks for the reply dead D, regarding your question; well, I have a long history of lurking and posting various online forums, and ever since your website has gained more views and posts I thought this place needs to be trimmed a bit for different reasons;
    first, because when a new user arrives with all the stress they already have because of the problem they are dealing with (cancer) they may get confused very easily, there are many comments by many different users and one gets lost easily being exposed to all the info,
    second, many topics tend to go off-topic after a while, as you noticed some comments under a topic actually belong to another topic, some of the discussion are not even directly related to cancer, etc.
    I believe you need to add a forum for the purpose of general discussions in which users are allowed to come up with what ever topic they want and others can participate and brainstorm to see if anything real comes out of it. then, if for an instance the info regarding that subject could be backed by enough science to make it worthy, you can add it as a post to the core of your website. if not, it still helps your website to stay science based the way you want it to be.
    it also has the benefit of putting the burden of some the research off your shoulders. e.g. you can make a topic, regarding a hypothesis where the element X is worth looking into as a cancer treatment, then others can participate and add whatever they can to that specific subject until a there are enough info that a published article can emerge from it.
    this is something that can be improved later of course. this is just a rough idea.

    1. Hi Pouya, thank you. I understand and will consider starting a forum section. Just that it requires time to set that up and I am one person only. But I promise that will come at some point.
      I realize it may be too difficult for some readers following all the comments. And there is no way to trim the discussions or to constantly ask for comments in the right article. Do you think is better not to allow comments on future posts, in order not to have the readers confused? Thank you for your comments and suggestions, Pouya. I always appreciate constructive feedback.

      1. I was actually thinking along the same lines as Pouya, specifically after seeing the CA thread and having it be tough to navigate comments.

        I personally think comments should stay. They’re a pretty valuable part of the site specifically because they give us case reports on the various treatments which is as valuable as the theory contained within the actual articles.

      2. Hi Daniel, with a forum, each on the treatments discussed here could have a separate thread for case reports, personal experiences, etc. I’d close the comments under your published articles and let the comments go there. another advantage of a forum would be threads for treatments that do not have an article on your website for various reasons, (you have not been able to write and article yet, they are not valuable enough to be mentioned, etc, like LDN , GcMAF or others that you know better)

  2. Goodness me, I am learning so much on this amazing forum. I have been fighting for 4 years, and I have learned so much in one afternoon. Keep up the good work. I had never heard of MG until today 🙂

  3. Dear Daniel,
    I am highly excited when i learn this.
    MG Methylglyoxal inhibits both mitochondrial respiration and glycolysis.
    This drug is what i want to try with hyperthermia.
    I dont know if you gave this link before :

    But as we know MG also inhibits mitochondrial respiration of hearth cells.
    ”Protective effect of creatine against inhibition by methylglyoxal
    of mitochondrial respiration of cardiac cells”

    I wonder is it really a promising drug or just like citric acid on lab.
    Kind Regards

    1. Hi Ergin,

      My feeling regarding MG is that is higher risk/higher reward compared to citric acid. I actually see MG from a potential point of view in a category more towards those like 3BP, Sal, Diflunisal. Somewhere between these and DCA if I would place them on a scale of potential effectiveness based on my feeling. But I also feel it comes with risks, although maybe not that high as compared to Diflunisal that comes with bleeding risks (however we use it intensively with no bleeding).

      So I would not compare MG with CA.

      Kind regards,

  4. By contrast, phloretin, phlorizin, and 4,6-O-ethylidene-D-glucose bind to the estimated import site of GLUT1 (42, 43). Cytochalasin B, phloretin, and phlorizin inhibit the activity of GLUT4 also (44). However, these drugs do not inhibit yeast Hxts.4 Furthermore, as far as we know, no drugs capable of inhibiting yeast Hxts have been found. In that sense, our finding is the first to show a chemical that inhibits yeast Hxts.Thats MG.

  5. Is it MG which we are using now?
    There are clinical trials in 80’s.
    Effectiveness of methyl-GAG (methylglyoxal-bis[guanylhydrazone]) in patients with advanced malignant lymphoma.

    Hyperthermia and MG(1983)

    Enhanced antitumor efficacy with a combination of hyperthermochemotherapy and thermosensitization with polyamine antimetabolites in nude mice(1987)

    And article about DFMO.
    Polyamine deprivation: a new tool in cancer treatment.

      1. I’m giving my mother MG these days but I’m not worried about such side effects , the only thing I’m worried about is taking excessive chemo which is worse than all MG possible side effects in my opinion

  6. while I really appreciate all the great work you have done and think MGO has a strong antitumoral effect,as long as you are JUST focusing on killing cancer cells/getting rid of tumors (naturally or with synthetic drugs) and forgetting about seriously building/strenghtening the immune system(a weak immune system is why cancer cells get out of control and why cancer can grow!) you will never heal cancer-even if you manage to get rid of all the cancer cells in the body, if the immune system is weak ,cancer will return(and it’ll probably return in the same places) – i.e.:have a look at how the annecdotal patient in Netherlands is doing.or how cancer returns in other patients after surgery or chemo/radiation or after getting rid of tumors by other means !!!
    there are so many treatments that can get rid of tumors but if you want to heal cancer for good/long term ,getting rid of cancer cells is NOT a top priority(except when tumors are putting life in immediate danger -i.e. occlusions) .sure, it sounds good and gives peace of mind but cancer is like a fungus-whipe it out with chemicals or with a cloth and it’ll return;change the environment pH and it’ll disappear for good. the same with cancer:raise the pH , build /STRENGHTEN THE IMMUNE SSYSTEM and make sure the cancer patient SURVIVES while doing these and you’ll be safe .
    have a look at some statistics:
    with the Issels immune Treatments, so-called ‘incurable’ cancer patients have led full cancer-free lives, some for up to 45 years, and as follow-up to conventional treatment, the cure rate is as high as 87% .

    I really hope this will help you help others even better in the future.great work but focussing on killing tumors and forgetting about the immune system will get you back to where you have started(best case scenario!)

    1. Dear Cristian,

      Thank you for your comment. I do agree we need to also focus on supporting our immune system. But I do not agree that blood pH will be enough as you stated, to cure cancer. That is not a believe but a fact. I know clinics focusing on that approach and it is clear that is not enough. Also, while I believe and saw advanced cancer patients who eliminated their tumors with the help of various treatment approaches at various clinics around the world, 87% cure rate claim of a cancer clinic tells me you should stay away from them.

      There is a lot of time that I allocated and will allocate to this website. But I must admit that I only addressed below 10% of all the points I would like to address. So this website does not so far addresses the whole spectrum of approaches that an cancer patient needs to take at the same time. I did not discussed yet the impact of mind, of diets, etc. which I think are very relevant pieces of the puzzle. I also did not discussed yet ways to increase the immune system activity – I intend to do that when I find the time. Instead, I decided to start by first sharing some of the strongest weapons I found that can help address advanced cancers. Those are the cancers that will not response to a change in blood pH as you suggest, in most cases. Also, those are the cancers that do not respond to an improvements of immune system activity. For those, you need more effective treatments that can affect directly the tumors. I do think, that when cancers are in very initial stage, immune activation will help. But when you deal with advanced cancer, the story is different because of multiple reasons.

      I do recognize the origin of your statements. I read a lot of the website stating that, at the beginning of my dive into the cancer world. But most of those statements are not rooted into serious science but mostly are anecdotes. And during time, I saw patients following those anecdotes with no success. That was when I realize that the first filter we need to apply when information comes to us, is the scientific filter. You have to ask yourself: Is there strong enough scientific evidence? If yes, are there peer reviewed case reports where human have been cured using that approach? And if the answer is YES, it means you are on to something real. If not, skip it fast and move forward. I am not saying that this route will offer you 87% chance of success. But it will help you filter out the noise and focus on approaches that offer real chances for response.

      Cristian, I know you are very well intended man (as I think we did had a few e-mails exchanged) and you believe in what you are writing. But my friendly advice is to zoom out a bit from that perspective you are focused on now, and look from other perspectives too. Again, I believe that immune system is important and should be addressed. But tumors create an environment in which activated immune system does’t work. And that is not only related to extracellular pH, but much more than that. This is why I think when designing a treatment strategy you need to address multiple cancer hallmarks and make sure you include the most relevant ones.

      Kind regards,

      1. Dear Daniel, I not that of a good man but I wonder where I mentioned raising blood pH (of course you know it is not good messing with blood’s ph ) and that being the answer to cancer?
        As I made myself misunderstood I will say again I was referring to the ENVIRONMENT’s pH(meaning pH of cells and their surroundings) to STOP THE RAPID SPREAD (cancer spreads faster in an acidic environment) of cancer or even put them into hibernation or kill them(i.e. see cesium chloride, baking soda etc)- you have addressed this issue as far as I know.

        indeed there are so many urgent matters that need to be addressed with an advanced cancer patient (and I am glad you are aware of that) and one must address them according to his specific situation;
        focusing on mainly killing cancer cells fast is not what we need to focus – know the body and liver must be able to eliminate dead cancer cells or the patient could die! my point is we need to be balanced and work on a multitasking approach.
        Measuring progress /results solely on size of tumors is a trap(i.e. tumors might “apparently grow” due to the immune attack) as well as relying on what is ‘strong scientific evidence’ is a BIIIIIG trap(and by strong scientific evidence I am referring to what the medical community is acknowledging at this time ).

        I will quote 2 Nobel prize winners Otto Warturg and Linus Paling:
        “Everyone should know that the ‘war on cancer’ is largely a fraud” Linus Pauling
        ” Many experts agree that one could prevent about 80% of all cancers in man, if one could keep away the known carcinogens from the normal body cells. This prevention of cancer might involve no expenses, and especially would require little further research to bring about cancer prevention in up to 80 percent *).

        *) Since this estimate was published, some though 80% even to low. Yet prevention remained taboo and early diagnosis was the only consolation that was offered.

        Why then does it happen that in spite of all this so little is done towards the prevention of cancer? The answer has always been that one does not know what cancer or the prime cause of cancer be, and that one cannot prevent something that is not known.

        But nobody today can say that one does not know what cancer and its prime cause be. On the contrary, there is no disease whose prime cause is better known, so that today ignorance is no longer an excuse that one cannot do more about prevention. That prevention of cancer will come there is no doubt, for man wishes to survive. But how long prevention will be avoided depends on how long the prophets of agnosticism will succeed in inhibiting the application of scientific knowledge in the cancer field. In the meantime, MILLIONS of men must DIE of cancer unnecessarily.
        ” Revised lecture at the meeting of the Nobel-Laureates on June 30, 1966
        at Lindau, Lake Constance, Germany

        by Otto Warburg
        Director, Max Planck-Institute for Cell Physiology, Berlin-Dahlem
        English Edition by Dean Burk
        National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
        The Second Revised Edition
        Published by Konrad Triltsch, Würzburg, Germany

        You see Daniel lot’s of NATURAL treatments work and have a great amount of science behind them (and you will realize this if you start putting into practice NATURAL treatments that former patients say work ).
        The main problem is we live in a world where conventional medicine is not looking for the best treatment (wich is in most/probably all cases a natural remedy God has already built as the Bible assures us) that but for the most expensive.
        NO mane maker, no ‘scientifc evidence’.

        There have been so many cases of excellent cancer treatments that have been buried or classified as quacks by FDA( Hoaxey’s plant based remedy , Gastons Naessens dark field microscope finding’s about the pleomorphic microoorganisms behing cancer, Royal Rife machines that kill these pleomorphic microorganisms,Linus Pauling’s Vitamin C , Gerson & Kelley metabolic regimes , Johanna Budwig’s diet based on Wartburg’s and Szent Gyorgi’s discoveries, Dr. Burzinsky’s antineoplastons….most…probably all natural cancer treatments have been classified as quack due to ”lack of scientific evidence’ – why?! why oral vitamin C instead of IV administration used in Mayo’s trial, why diluted sollutions, why prosecute BUrzinski and Kelley and Gerson and Issels even though they have had so many cured patients and well documented data….why is the case that almost always they use diluted or mess with the formulations to ‘prove’ these treatments do not ‘have scientific evidence’? why did the ‘scientific community’ try to reject Wartburg’s finding’s up until recently ? why feed the cancer patient sugar even though they use PET /CT knowing sugar gets directly into cancer cells?!!)
        On the other hand thanks to good people who risk(ed) their lives (i.e.: Nicolas Gonzales, Dr Riordan who is died just before publising the clinical trial on IV vitamin C and other people willing to risk their lives to help others …solid scientific proof starts to pop up on pubmed and other similar scientific communities’.
        But until things will clear up and scientific backup will show up on pubmed and the conventional scientific community will start applying these there might be another hundred years-keep in mind Wartburg won his Nobel prize in 1931…what did the scientific community do since then to build on his work?!Mostly classify his findings as wrong?(I really like the above MGO treatment as it confirms and links Wartburg’s, SzentGyorgi’s and Pauling’s findings )

        My advice to you is to investigate better natural,plant based treatments backed up by testimonials even though they ‘lack scientific proof ‘ or ‘have been classified as ‘ quacks’ .I think you will be surprised to see they actually and practically work.
        I did this experiment and this is my experience with cancer patients:
        1. no matter the stage, God and God’s creation( Nature) work.
        2. Nature does not work well or does not work at all ON LING TERM when combined with ‘scientifically proven’ chemotherapy and radiation.
        I will say on more thing from my heart to you :
        I have seen my mother’s case and other’s similar cases impaired by chemo and radiation and how they struggle and die even though they eventually try natural remedies as a last resort.
        And I have known other people with same type of cancer in more advanced stages that doctors gave days/weeks to live and they got better with natural treatments.
        And I am not the only one that has had this PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE.
        When you actually know these you cannot shut up knowing people are taking a wrong path. I loved and love my mother and I want others to benefit from our experience.I want others to chose wisely

        Please analyze LONG TERM outcomes from both sides: conventional medicine( with serious side effects and and 5 years SURVIVAL rate(NOT cure but SURVIVAL) ) and natural medicine ( almost no side effects, with cured patients, people THAT ACTUALLY EXIST but ‘scientific community’ classifies as ‘lack of proof, more studies needed, etc’ -i.e: see Burzinski’s trial if you do not believe me- CANCER IS A SERIOUS BUSINESS : )

        did you have a look at the issels results and case though?!

        Please excuse me. God Bless Us!

        1. Hi Cristian,

          I will respond asap. For now, addressing a few of your points:

          – what I just want from us is to go beyond pointing fingers to anyone suggesting that someone is against finding the cure. I think it is the framework that we build as society that is not the right one to facilitate a fast progress. And that is what we need to change. But that takes time and will be a long term project. I will be happy to discuss with you any anyone else what could be the ways to achieve that. On short term we have to look in an unbiased way at anything that may be effective and expose that.

          – I use the “scientific evidence” as a filter. But that doesn’t mean that I do not have an eye on the purely anecdotal ones. I always do. But “scientific evidence” filter I found to work well. Note that in academic space, there is a large group of researchers who are investigating substances without the business reasons behind, making the scientific evidence unbiased in many cases. Their results include many many natural products. Some of them I already addressed.

          – I know people who have good outcome with Curcumin and I know people who have good outcome with Chemo. So, suggesting to people to go one way or the other will not make me slip well at night. Who are we to suggest what is better. What we should do is to expose new treatments that may be effective or ways to improve current treatments, based on scientific and anecdotal evidence. And people should decide what is best for them.
          Yes, it is clear that the chemo route is more likely to come with strong side effects, including lethal. That is well known, and people need to consider that as well.

          In order to progress we need to move forward in a constructive manner: i.e. we need to get the best out of this world whether it comes from an university, a pharma company, an alternative clinic/doctor/scientist or any other source such as TCM.

          Kind regards,

    2. hi Cristian,

      the problem with this “immune approach” is that many types of cancer simply trick the immune system and if you make the latter stronger you will just fail quicker. There are lab studies proving that lymphocites are helping tumours to grow. This is one example…. Think of the very healthy people who get cancer …. On the long term the immune system is super important but on the short and middle term we talk about cells that are not identified by the immune system as cancer…

      1. who/what is stopping you at helping the immune system identify those cells? digest those proteins that coat the tumors with proteolitic enzymes, raise the ph around cancer cells, starve cancer cells with cesium chloride…there are so many techniques that help the immune system recognize the cancer cells.
        the problems with building the immune system are: is slow process so you need to make sure the patient survives while you do it;
        2. inflammation and swelling occurs when the immune system recognizes and attacks cancer cells-but again, you have lots of great anti-inflammatory substances such as DMSO/MSM, cucurmin,boswellia,etc.
        the immune system is the key to making sure you get rid of cancer for good but there are always other more urgent problems with a cancer patient you need to address – and you must address these as well or the patient will die

        1. Dear Cristian,

          I so much understand your angle.

          The elements you mentioned are good, with the exception of cesium chloride. However, all those elements are not enough when fighting aggressive and advanced cancer. We tried them all and intensively in our first year (with the exception of cesium). I know also doctors who tried cesium chloride on many patients and no response – only complications from that.

          I like enzymes and we used constantly high dose of some of the most relevant ones – I intend to write a post on that too. But it is not enough for most people. In theory sounds great to use enzymes to digest proteins that coat tumors and activate the immune system, and that’s it. I know those stories very well. In reality enzymes (not all but those used in alternative world) are a too soft approach for advanced cancers – one that should be used as a background approach but not as a main approach.

          Actually, I even wrote a post on an approach to digest a coating around the tumor But when you are effective in doing that, you may trigger metastasis in case you do not combine that withe an effective treatment that can kill the exposed cancer cells. Activating the immune system, as we discussed before is not enough to ensure its anti cancer effectiveness. So that means when you really succeed to open up the coating, you need some treatment around with a good chance for effectiveness. That is what this company is trying to achieve while being in clinical trials

          DMSO is a great tool – but again, alone it doesn’t do much – it can however help increase the effectiveness of other treatments. (I know it very well as it is used IV in alternative clinics)

          pH subject was discussed here and I think the best approach to re balance pH around the tumors is not to focus on outside but on inside using proton transport inhibitors or even better, focus on inhibiting fermentation (glycolisis). That is working at the origin of the acidity. We discussed many inhibitors of fermentation on this website.

          I like Curcumin, I like Broswellia, I like DMSO, I like enzymes, but all of these are not enough to fight advanced cancers. (The exception in my view is Curcumin IV that can be effective in reducing tumors as I do know people who experienced that.) These and many more natural supplements, I would use them as a background treatment. But on top of this, we need to add the “tip of the arrow” treatment. That is what I am trying to address here.

          Finally, I think that your first question still doesn’t have an answer today. If it would, cancer would be cured.

          Immune system is extremely powerful – better than anything. But no one today, understands why it does’t work against cancer. There are off coarse a lot of ideas, and some may work in some cases, but the world is still walking in the dark when we speak about understanding the immune system.

          Since we do not have time to wait until the world understands the immune system and create effective solutions based on that, we should work in parallel and attack cancer from angles that we think we understand better, and that have been proven (by trusted sources) to be effective in humans.

          I hope one day we meet and discuss these points in details.

          Kind regards,

          1. a little something about immunity on the long term:

            Cesium chloride works and is very powerful but causes inflammation and swelling and a lot of problems (serum Potasium levels go down etc – you need guidance )
            „Many human trials have been carried out by [late] Dr. H. Nieper in Hannover, Germany, … as well as a number of other physicians Overall, the results were satisfactory Oart f .. He noted that all pains associated with cancer disappear between 12 and 24 hours, except in very few cases where there were problems of morphine waiver, which requires a few more hours. „

            Many celebrities and executives in America went to Germany to be treated by Dr. Nieper, including a U.S. president. Dr. Nieper died in 1998.


            Cesium treatment achieved a cure rate of 50% in patients with very advanced cancer, some already in a coma. 47 of the 50 patients were „hopeless” and some had only days to live .Doctors have given very high doses of cesium .


            Excepts from „Cesium Therapy in Cancer Patients”

            Treatment was performed on 50 patients during the last three years at Life Sciences Universal Medical Clinics in Rockville MD and in Washington D.C. All patients were terminal subjects with generalized metastatic disease. 47 of the 50 patients studies had received maximal modalities of treatment, i.e., surgery, radiation, and various chemotherapy, before metabolic Cesium-treatment was initiated. Three patients were comatose and 14 of the patients were considered terminal due to previous treatments outcome and cancer complications.

            The Cesium-treatment was given in conjunction of other supportive compounds under diet control in addition to the utilization of specific compounds to produce adequate circulation and oxygenation. According to individual cases Cesium Chloride was given at daily dosages of 6 to 9 grams in 3 equally divided doses, with vitamin A-emulsion (100,000 to 300,000 U), vitamin C (4 to 30 grams), zinc (80 to 100 mg) selenium (600 to 1,200 mcg) and amygdalin (1,500 mg) in addition to other supplementations according to the specific needs of the patient. The diet consisted mainly of whole grains, vegetables, linolenic acid rich oils (linseed, walnut, soy, wheat germ) and other supplemental food. To increase efficiency of the treatment and improve the circulation and oxygenation, the patients received the chelating agent EDTA, dimethylsulfoxide (DMSO) and also a combination of vitamin K and Mg salts.

            The 50 cancer patients studied over 3 years had generalized metastatic disease, except for 3 patients. Initial death occurrences for the initial 2 week treatment was in the same order and magnitude of these recorded for the 12 month period. The percent of survival of breast, colon, prostate, pancreas, and lung cancer accounted to approximately, 50% recovery which was higher than that noted for liver cancer and the lymphoma patients treated. An overall 50% recovery from cancer by the Cesium-therapy was determined in the 50 patients treated. Data from the autopsy made indicated the absence of tumors in patient dying within 14 days of the Cesium-treatment.

            One of the most striking effects of the treatment was the disappearance of pain in all patients within 1 to 3 days after initiation of the Cesium-therapy.

            Though it is a very powerful treatment and can offer terminal cancer patients many chances, CESIUM comes with many WARNINGS (warnings that many cesium vendors „fotget” to mention) and should NOT be used by everyone(ATTENTION those with DANGEROUS TUMORS( any situation when the temporary tumor swelling or inflamation can put the life of the patient in danger: BRAIN cancer, LUNG cancer,etc. ).

            Also , Potassium levels MUST be monitored.


            yes,as I also stated, we need a more complex approach than taking just some supplements(these supplements are also good at what they are doing-they are just pieces of the puzzle and I agree the puzzle has not fully completed yet for all cases but lots have healed)

            My question regarding ‘scientifically proven’ could have been different-how do you expect to find a long term solution to cancer by researching among data that does not offer a long term solution?

            1. I know the stories Cristian, but unfortunately all the feedback I have from doctors and patients is that Cesium doesn’t work. Trust me, I would very much like that to be a positive feedback and immediately I would write a post on it. I am always open to change my view if there is evidence I am wrong since life of people is what matters not my beliefs.

            2. Regarding your last question C:
              What do you mean with “researching data that does not offer a long term solution”?
              If you will read my post, you will find references to reports showing long term response to various cancers based on various substances (drugs and non -drugs; natural and synthetic).

          2. hi Daniel,

            as to why the immune system does not work against cancer; australian researches investigated this for breast cancer. They noticed that the cancer cells had knocked out the gene IRF7. this gene is responsible for producing the key immunprotein called interferon. Cancer was blocked in mice when they added this gene or interferon …

            Conclusions are somewhat blurry as then again… we do not seem to be able to cope with cancer using genetic meds…

  7. there are many other potent treatments like mgo or cesium or vitamin c or honey , cucurmin, etc but these are just pieces of the puzzle and I do agree the puzzle for all cases has not been solved – but for some it has been and we should learn from those long term remissions even though thy are ‘anecdotal stories’.
    I simply cannot understand how we may learn from ‘scientific’ cases that lack long term results , focus solely on putting tumors into remission and accept only 5 year survival rates, NOT cures.
    I really am very enthusiastic about studies popping out confirming WARTBURG’S , SZENT-GYORGI’S,PAULING’S and other findings of great scientists that date from last century;but that is also my problem-they date from last century and they are only popping out now and in limited amount and in combination with conventional treatments that have shown no major improvement for over 50 years.
    who knows how much it’ll take to solve the puzzle on pubmed 🙂

  8. I think cancer patients who will manage to heal their cancers will help you understand my point that GOD’s nature has always offered great results (if it is God’s will for them to heal) whereas no major improvement in last 50 years in conventional oncology speaks for itself;
    I think I worry to much as from what I see you seem to be smarter than I am-you just need to work with patients more;I do agree with you we cannot tell people what to choose but we can present them facts (and facts include real stories of other patients that have healed from cancer, even though they are not on pubmed (or similar) yet ; beware of psychotherapies though – yoga, meditation , kundalini , reiki, silva, mind control and other techniques that make man think he is godlike 🙂 )
    God bless us all!

    1. Thanks but I think we are all smart here. That is what brings us together here: being smart and proactive. I do not intend to work with patients – that would be too much for me in terms of responsibility. Otherwise, my exposure to the real world has been extreme, unfortunately. Not to speak about the constant feedback I receive via doctors and patients from around the world on what works and what doesn’t … that for me is enough exposure to the real world, for now. Regarding the pubmed, the value of having something published there is that the claims are checked by referees (although that is not a guarantee since these days there are so many unchecked or poorly referenced papers – this is why you still need to make your own due diligence).

      An example of a pressure test for using scientific evidence vs not using that is e.g. Curcumin vs. B17.
      Check for the science on B17 and you will find very little trusted sources supporting that. Check the science on Curcumin and you will find a huge amount of trusted sources supporting its anti cancer potential. Next check with an unbiased cancer clinic for how many cancer patients have responded to B17 and check same for Curcumin. Then you will understand my point. But please check this with unbiased doctors from alternative clinics, and avoid those using the anecdotal marketing behind B17.

  9. to prove I really appreciate you work (and envy you to some point 🙂 ) , I am picking up some studies and treatments presented here;but from what I have witnessed from discussing with cancer patients, I cannot agree with conventional treatments too much , that is why I was so ”aggressive” above ( I do not others to suffer ).

    1. Thanks Cristian. I would appreciate if you add links to this website when you are going to write articles based on the content consolidated here. I very much understand your irritation regarding current status in the cancer treatment world. I am one of those who can understand it the best given the loss of my dear wife. But I think we need to consider all the tools available in this world, and perform a strong pressure test on them since the world is full of anecdotes.

  10. I guess that We all share the feeling that more could be done, that this should be already solved, and that me should not be here looking for an answer of how to help my family menber or even myselft. This feeling of wake up and check for some usefull new about this…
    By the way, i found today this, ,
    Considering true, what we are fighting?? Such a simbiosis?? I belive or this is customized, something like bacteriogram, or no solutions in short times . Bacterias inside tumor, that helps to be resistent!!!

    1. Very very interesting Jandro. Thanks for the link. This reminds me of a very good scientist from US who suggested I should always treat my wife with anti parasites, anti bacterial drugs prior to any major treatment like chemo or 3BP or anything I expect to be effective. Exactly due to the reasons explained in the article.
      This article reminds me that such approach (anti parazites/anti bacteria) may have to be a rule prior to initiation of anti cancer therapies.

      Also note that this article was published in Science, one of the most prestigious scientific journal where usually only breakthrough discoveries are published.

      1. Hi Cristian and All,

        what an amazing find! And how much these pioneers were maligned by the mainstream cancer industry for claiming they saw “microbes” in the tumour! Now published also in Science… I haven’t read either article in full, sorry. But drugs become resistant often due to an ABC transporter protein that will carry the drug back to the outside of the tumour. And these transporters also exist in bacteria, cause of resistance to antibiotics. Could that be also the mechanism to account for the resistance of the tumour, I wonder?


            1. regarding ABC transporters, that is only my musing. But bacterial and human ABC transporters show about 30-50% sequence similarity on the protein level, so if they saw such phenomenon, they could distinguish between the human and bacterial variant by sequencing it.

            2. true.i thought you were referring to something else.
              I think it is best to contact biologist Gaston Naessens at for more Robert Young has also seen them using dark field microscope.Interestingly, a relative of a patient I used to talk to(had some kind of sarcoma if I remember correctly) sent probes for biopsy and pleomorphic nucleus (es) were noticed

            3. are you referring to Robert O Young? He was arrested recently for his “pseudoscience”. There is a blogger, “science-based medicine” who is apparently a paid shill for big pharma, who blogged about Young.

  11. Dear Cristian,
    Firstly thanks for entering this communication,we really need those kinds of arguments here.This makes us stronger and knowledgable.
    I have a question for you.
    How did you come to Methylglyoxal post ?
    What makes you to come here?Which searching?
    Is it because of a treatment which done before:
    Cow urine treatment which has MG inside.
    Do you think also in antineoplaston therapy, urine
    is used?
    Kind Regards

    1. Thank you very much dear Ergin , yes GLO1 overexpression may lead to resistant

      unfortunately I’m not addressing this issue and just hoping that there is no such problem with my mother , I don’t have curcumin , and I don’t think that turmeric is enough to address the issue

      we wouldn’t know if MG is working , probably we may need to add more

      1. I have become excited about the idea of combining a range of synergizing chemicals with MG.

        The suggestion above is to combine MG, vitamin C, B vitamins and Creatine.
        I have started to wonder why not use the tumor specific forms?

        NanoMG was found to be up to hundreds of times more powerful than straight MG.
        Anyone know what the toxic dose of NanoMG is?
        You could then add in other tumor specific formulations:

        PMID: 25999714 Chitosan MG NanoMG
        PMID: 14641067 Tumor specific GSH depletors
        PMID:22007962 Tumor Specific curcumin
        Chitosan Vitamin C online sources

        Not so sure about the curcumin because you would want to stay away from anti-oxidants when using pro-oxidant Vitamin C. Would be great to add in a tumor specific Glo-2 inhibitor. This would deplete GSH levels.

        Being specific in this way one could have a very large effect on the tumor.
        It was suggested above to use a fairly modest Vitamin C dose of perhaps 400 mg.
        What why a larger dose was not suggested?

        1. HI J, there are so many effective drugs that could be brought to the tumor via encapsulation …. I also very much like this idea and it should be so easy to implement based on the existing science and technology … but somehow that does not happen which I find it strange. I hope and expect one day we (and by that I mean you, I and others interested) will be able to do it.

  12. lullabyman, MG has you thinking too?
    What would happen if all energy supply were removed from cancer cells, while normal were undisturbed?
    The metabolic perspective greatly simplifies what can be an overwhelmingly convoluted topic.

    I typically search out the leading edge of the fancy science, though there are now quite a few apparently innocuous chemicals that when combined properly could have very large anti-tumor action!

    This judicious avoidance of an optimal response, that you noted, was most strongly noticeable to me with the methylglyoxal, vitamin C, creatine combination. 400 mg of vitamin C (as you noted in the form of Chewables?)??? Is that a joke? 400 mg of vitamin C might give you a pro-oxidant effect!!!

    Why go with the minimum possible vitamin C dose? I am not totally sure what the state of the art of maximal vitamin C iv dosing might be, yet 200 grams might not be far off! We have reached an era of cancer research where there is an apparent lack of effort to gain every last inch of treatment power. Back in the 1970s there were human clinical trials in which a substantial percentage of the cancer patients had fatal side effects and the trial would continue without stoppage! In the current era there is often a large dose buffer in order to avoid toxicity of any kind even in the lab models. Avoiding any and all potential for the possibility of even temporary mild side effects is not consistent with the best interests of desperately ill cancer patients nor is it consistent with international human rights legislation.

    Yes, the vitamin C + doxycycline was an impressive result; one does see how substitutions might be advantageous. Hmm, vitamin C is a not so good an OXPHOS inhibitor? That sounds right, though of course references are wanted and needed! In terms of buying methylglyoxal without prescription, does this include chemically refined MG or only the refined Manuka honey?

    I remember seeing the Puerto Rican vitamin C study. It was just that I am always worried that something unexpected might happen when a treatment is changed around. I would not think that a combo of metronomic vitamin C and MG would cause trouble, yet with these combinations it is almost certain that they will never be tried in a clinical trial. In fact, some of these do not appear to have even been adequately tested in lab models! One is always left with a certain uncertainty. As it is there is vitamin C, MG, and 3-BP which all have strong monotherapy selectivities for glycolysis and/or OXPHOS. Putting them together in an optimized treatment could give very impressive results.

    One might simply start with the basic treatments, acquire a comfort level with them and then up dose and reformulate.

    Perhaps a treatment could be something like:
    -Start with the generic MG protocol: 40 mg/kg/day oral MG taken in 4 divided doses, 500 mg oral vitamin C chewables, creatine etc.
    – With the generic protocol up dose the vitamin C and switch to iv dosing.
    – Perhaps updose somewhat with the MG.
    Fortunately there is an MG scavenger, aminoguanidine, so you can also have the comfort of knowing that you can control the downdosing PMID: 26530987
    -Move to iv MG dosing. D’s dosing suggestion for iv MG was 10 mg/kg/day which I would guess would give you much higher blood levels of MG. Still this would be 500+ mg per day iv which seems like quite a bit. It shows me that there is a fair amount of wiggle room involved in the dosing.
    – As the comfort level increased one might consider moving to NanoMG. PMID: 25999714
    I realize that most people want to avoid the synthesis route, though the benefits available from this synth are notable.
    The method that was used involves no complex chemical lab procedures at all.

    The big problem that appears to eternally recur when people avoid the synth lab is that they will up dose on the raw chemical: this is typically a very poor strategy. In one of the figures I saw on MG, it was quite startling to see that once a high dose was reached, even doubling the dosage resulted in no further increase in concentration in the cancer cells. What you would be doing is simply increasing the toxicity for all the normal cells.

Leave a Reply