It was the result of a research paper done by Dr. Evan Mickelos at the University of Alberta at Edmonton. He claimed to kill cancer cells in mice and cell cultures without harming healthy tissue using DCA.
The only problem is cancer has been cured many times in lab animals and cell cultures. However, nothing has translated to a cure in humans. The last major hype was anti-angiogenesis drugs. There was alot of "cure for cancer" overexuberance then too.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/printout/0,8816,988347,00.html
If you read, Dr/ Mickelos own website, you will see even he says this is not ready as a cancer treatment. Clinical trials are needed to determine dosage, toxicity and, effectiveness. In addition, the DCA will probably have to be refined to a final drug product should it become approved. (Many chemotherapy drugs like Taxol started with plant products or other chemical).
http://www.depmed.ualberta.ca/dca/
Most likely, if DCA is safe and effective, DCA will be an adjuvant therapy to provide additional length of survival not a cure. Like the anti-angiogeneis drugs, DCA attacks the support mechanism of cancer (mitochrondria) not the actual genetic mutations causing the cancer.
DCA may have promise but, don't hold your breath. There are literally dozens of cancer drugs with similar potential at the same stage as DCA.
In summary, the story is an Internet legend. Read Dr. Len Litchenfeld's (American Cancer Society) blog entry on DCA.
http://www.cancer.org/aspx/blog/Comments.aspx?id=130
2007-03-01 05:50:58
·
answer #1
·
answered by oncogenomics 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
So far there is no authenticated cure for cancer. Though many foods an ingredients are found to posess anti-cancer properties ( you can search for " foods that cure cancer" in the net). Many alternative medicines claim that they have a cure for cancer but there is no uniformity in their cure and hence could not be deemed as cures. What at present is being done for cancer is simply destroying the cancer cell either by surgical removal or through radiation. After that the doctors are giving chemotherapy which is nothing but chemical poisons which will destroy all rapidly growing cells ( because cancer cell grow rapidly) this they claim that it kill all the cancer cell and the patient would live free from cancer for many more number of years than if they do not take chemo but only undergo surgery / radiation. But here once again though statistics prove to a certain extent that chemo prolongs the life of a cancer affected person there is no fool proof evidence that it does it so. Because many are living but some are perishing it could also mean that for people whose total cancer cells have been removed by surgery / radiation are simply taking the chemo and the unfortunate persons for whom surgery/ radiation has not removed the cancer fully are simply dying even after chemo and all the benifit they had is only the horrible side effects of the chemo. Hope this gives you some insight into cancer. All the best.
2007-02-28 23:51:06
·
answer #2
·
answered by ssmindia 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
There are all sorts of claims by various researchers that you really need to evaluate first what kind of drug they are talking about. Don't forget that most drugs have side effects. You also need human clinical tests of more than 10 years to know if the drugs are truly safe.
My suggestion is to first research on what is cancer and its root causes. Then, the focus should be on eliminating the root causes rather than having drug treatments.
2007-02-28 14:48:20
·
answer #3
·
answered by mindalchemy 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I'm afraid I can't comment specifically since I didn't see the article, but I have yet to see anything like that mentioned in any of the major medical journals I do read (and that's the sort of thing they would mention) so I would say to be skeptical about those sorts of claims, I'd certainly be very happy if that were true, but cancer is a bit of a tough nut to crack (to say nothing of the fact that each malignancy of each organ and cell type is basically a different disease).
2007-02-28 14:50:00
·
answer #4
·
answered by The Doc 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Hello! I don't know of that drug, but wanted to offer some food for thought. I'm a holistic doctor practising in Ontario, and have faciliated the remission of cancer (and other "terminal" diseases) on more than one occasion. Just today at my clinic, we celebrated the journey of a patient whom Western docs claimed would have died last week. My patient, stronger than ever, to honour his triumph, just signed up for the summer season of baseball. Here are some general guidelines that holistic docs use to bring cancer into balance:
1) Cancer has a ph of 4.5. Therefore, it cannot exist in an alkaline environment. First thing I do is put the patient on an alkaline diet. This makes the internal environment of the patient incompatible with growing more cancer cells. Alkaline foods include veggies, fruits, millet, tofu etc. NO SUGAR/WHEAT/DAIRY/MEAT/VINEGAR etc.
2) DETOX. No chemicals. Switch to all natural deodorant, shampoo, pesticides, toothpaste.
3) Herbs, depending on the cancer, to strengthen the appropriate organs and the immune system. Herbs I consider include: pau d'arco, burdock, red clover, echinacea etc.
4) Acupuncture. Can't stress this one enough. To align the energy and boost the immune system.
5) Release anger. I have found that the emotional root that supports cancer is repressed anger. Through therapy, we go and release that negativity from the cells, thereby promoting healing.
I wish you peace and joy,
DocM
2007-02-28 15:03:24
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋
There is research going on and that is what the media was reporting . . as always the media blew the information way out of proportion making it seem better than it was.
The question has been asked 19 times before this and you can look it up yourself:
http://answers.yahoo.com/search/search_result;_ylt=Akn0X27P5MXiYV0zjUkFj4DcxQt.?p=dichloroacetate
2007-03-01 05:19:12
·
answer #6
·
answered by Panda 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Old news...
This guy was first >>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Raymond_Rife
2007-02-28 14:51:17
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋