You guessed it, 0.4 cm
tumor at the edge of his brain, still symptom free. Almost 2 years after the initial diagnosis. Now he has finally started the green tea extract and grape seed extract. It's been difficult to get him to try anything that we know works in animals. People get annoyed if you try to push them. It also depresses them to think about the fact that they have cancer. The general population is completely unable to identify the legitimate science that is out there, choosing instead to fall for the professional oncology routine, or for the flood of feel-good hoaky stuff. They also can't grasp that the heavy doses of the right
supplements are everything. You can recommend I.V. vit C and their cheery response is "Oh, I'm already take a bunch of it everyday." Or you recommend berberine or pomegranate extract at 4 grams/day and they say "gee that sure is expensive." Life isn't worth $6 a day to most people. I've tried to send people links and explain things, but it's almost universally a waste of time. My advice to those trying to help a friend with cancer to take the right nutritional pills is to forget it. They'll only open up when it is too late.
Here's my update of the above information. Good for all cancers, but biased towards lung cancer.
This is for treating existing cancer. The indicated doses are based on mice studies and a 2000 calorie human diet, and are similar to the doses used in human trials. The
tumor reduction percentages are compared to those not receiving treatment, not a reduction in the size or number of
tumors after treatment. The hope is that the percentages correspond to increased lifespan, and that the effects are additive. The 6 treatments in the list each had at least a 50% reduction in
tumor size, number, and/or metastases. Taking half the dose usually causes the cancer to grow twice as fast as the full dose, so the amounts are important. I found these by searching PubMed with "[nutrient] cancer mice". This has a bias towards lung cancer. There are a couple of other options for breast, prostate, skin, and colon cancers like soy products, beta-sistosterol, curcumin, and resveratrol (see discussion).
Here's the summary:
All fats from fish oil, at least 50 grams per day (20% of daily calories) $4.50/day
12 Green Tea Extract with caffeine (6,000 mg) * $1/day
12 Grape Seed Extract (3,000 mg) * $2/day
8 Berberine (2,000 mg) $2/day
4 pomegranate extract (1,600 mg) $2/day
2 to 4 teaspoons cinnamon
Basic nutrition: 1 vitamin C twice a day (2,000 mg), 1 vitamin D (5,000 IU), 1 vit B50 complex
As much of the green tops of broccoli as possible.
===============
40 pills per day, about $360 a month. This is possible if pills are divided into 4 sets of 12 taken every 4 hours. If fewer pills are desired, skip methylselenocysteine.
Most of this is tart flavonoids which can be difficult to tolerate, especially without food and
milk and the doses have been reduced to be the bare minimum that can duplicate the mouse studies. They definitely need to be divided up into 4 doses per day.
Keep in mind, a 30% reduction in calories causes a 25% increase in lifespan, with or without cancer.
Broccoli and
Citrus pills may be great, but they are not standardized extracts, so simply eating the darkest color parts of these plants (like the skin and seeds of tangerines) may be just as good as taking 20 each of these pills per day.
Compounds that appear great but are not available to the public: Betulinic acid, deguelin, silibinin, certain compounds of broccoli (the extracts do not seem to have enough), Ginsenoside Rg3 from ginseng, and certain soy genistein formulations.
Compounds that do not have strong enough evidence yet for most a wide range of cancers but may work well in specific cancers: IP6, selenite, methylselenocysteine, soy and genistein.
Compounds that may work on certain cancers by direct contact like skin and colon, but are otherwise not bioavialable in humans: curcumin, resveratrol. Curcumin maybe in prostate and pancreas when combined with a liposomal carrier.
Compounds where the situation is complex and I need to study: I3C (estrogen problem?), vitamin E, vitamin A, and the flavonols quercetin and kaempferol, and soy isoflavones.
Here are the details Total intake of flavonoids (as in this list of cinnamon, grape seeds, green tea, and pomegranate) in humans is normally around 0.05 g/d, but the mouse studies show good reduction in
tumors at around 5 to 10 g/d (converted to human dose). A "paleolithic" diet did not have fertilizers and genetics to reduce the nutrient density provided 1 g/d. For example, our ancestors received 20 times more vitamin C. The mice studies show that 5 times more than this paleolithic normal is required for flavonoids to seriously slow cancer. There are 4 different classes of flavonoids suggested, so taking all of them could result in about 15 times more than the paleolithic normal which increases the chances of toxicity. Since these are natural and common compounds, the toxicity should be mild and reversible.
green tea extract with catechins 6 g
20 weeks after BaPat lung cancer inoculation,
1% in diet in diet of 65% EGCG (equiv to 1.5% in water tea solids) for 25 weeks gave twice as much in blood and lung tissue compared to 0.5% in water. This resulted in
10 times fewer large and medium tumors, but not a change in the number of
tumors, indicating growth rate was slowed. In another study 0.5% in drinking water of the same extract extract was started 20 weeks
after NNK lung cancer inoculation and lasted for 32 weeks resulting in 50% fewer adenocarcinomas developing.GTE has Flavonols: quercetin, kaempferol, myricetin like capers. The EGCG (a flavAnol) does not work without the catechins (another flavAnol). One study thinks catechins in green tea extract might allow curcumin to finally work in vivo.
Curcumin is not otherwise bio-available in pure form. Only 3% of 30 men with neoplasias got prostate cancer after one year at only 600 mg/d, verses 30% of controls. 12 weeks at 6 g/d in human mouth pre-cancerous lesions resulted in 59% fewer cancers. Half the dose had only 38% reduction. At 4 g/d 66% of leukemia patients with palpable adenopathy had at least 50% reduction.
grape seed extract 3 g
0.5% in diet in mice resulted in
60% smaller
tumors when started 29 days after inoculation (2 years in people?). 2nd study with similar results. The proanthocyanidins worked on all 4 NSCLC cell types and mutations thereof. Grapes contain anthocyanins (like berries, cocoa), proanthocyanidins (like apples, cinnamon, cocoa, pycnogenol), and catechins (green tea) so benefits may overlap. It does not have the flavanones (citrus), flavonols (capers and tea extracts), nor certain special non-flavonoid compounds that are in pomegranate and broccoli.
Resveratrol with this won't hurt, but it is bio-unavailable unless it can come in contact with the cancer ( G.I. and use DMSO transport for skin and prostate). Resveratrol should be kept to less than 0.5 g/d to prevent ligament and tendon injury.
Pomegranate extract 1.6 g
The
0.2% in water lab-performed extract was fresh but not concentrated, intended to simulate 2 whole pomegranates in humans, and resulted in
50% smaller
tumors in NSCLC mice. 2nd study: 65% smaller lung
tumors that were induced (non-human), same dose: 0.2% in drinking water. Pomegranate has a large component of
ellagic acid and
punicalagins but it may overlap with other flavonoid nutrients because it has catechins, gallocatechins, and anthocyanins (the only flavylium). It
Berberine 2 g, $0.70/day.
0.2% diet in mice resulted in
80% smaller NSCLC
tumors (started before the NSCLC was injected). Also works to stop proliferation. Numerous studies. 10 different cancers tested in vitro so far in 2011. Bioavailability unknown. This is really too early considering the expense, but the dose is so much smaller and doable that it is hard to ignore.
Cinnamon 2 teaspoon/day. It has 2 times more proanthocyanidins (i.e. polymers of catechin flavAnols) than grape seeds, and these worked very well on NSCLC. Oral 400 mg/kg mouse (4 g per 70 kg human) weak extract for 30 days given 10 days
after melanoma inoculation gave 50% reduction compared to controls. Also tested in extensively in liver and 1 study in colon.
fish oil 6% or 8% by weight of diet caused
50% reduction in adenocarcinoma, improved NSCLC chemo. Another study: "fish oil supplementation [10% => about 50g/day per 70 kg person] was able to decrease lung
tumor [in mice] prevalence by 78% and 80%". This is well-studied. There is Coromega who supplies it in 2,000 mg citrus squeeze packets that tastes good so that 60 pills are not needed.
methylselenocysteine 3,200 mcg, 16 per day, 60 per day to being with. 70% smaller prostate
tumors in mice. In test tube only for lung cancer, but bioavailability seems reliable. Potentially toxic at these levels, fingernails and hair. Likely to work differently than plant compounds therefore better chance of being additive effect. If there is one pill in the list to skip, this is probably it.
Vitamin D, 1 per day 5,000 IU to be sure to get proper amount. ( 25 micrograms per 1,000 IU).
Vitamin B50 complex 1 per Same reason as for vitamin D.
Vitamin C 1,000 mg 2 to 4 times per day. Same reason as above.
Zinc causes nausea even at low dose, so it's not included.
Vitamin E 1.6g (1,600 IU)
[it's possibly already in the recommended fish oil for preservation]
Negative studies have come out on this, but 100 mg/kg mice (1 g per 70 kg person) had 60% less lung cancer when treatment started 4 months after cessation of smoke exposure. Quercetin had no effect. 450 mice, 2008 study. Evidence is weak for this one due to this one study, but the pill load and cost is small. Needs more study before listing.
Caffeine 0.600 g (4 strong cups coffee)
0.044% in water seemed to have a 50% effect in
tumorigenesis and post-
tumor metastasis and mice weighed 10% from less body fat. 0.02% in drinking water had no effect in another study that observed green tea benefits. 0.02% in water in another study had no effect.
Silibinin (from milk thistle) 0.3% in diet in mice caused 36% and 50% reduction in
tumor multiplicity and adenocarcinoma. 2nd study, 1% diet caused 50% reduction in medium
tumors, and 37% reduction in large
tumors. 3rd study, 0.1% diet had no effect in lung cancer. 1% would be 5 to 10 g/d. Additive effect with I3C in study. Does not appear to be easy to find.
Deguelin at 0.07 g per 500g diet reduces lung cancer load by 80%. Many cancers studied. Very powerful, low toxicity, but not apparently available. LD50 in humans 10g to 100g per day. Rapidly decomposes in light and air. Tephrosin & rotenone are co-existing rotenoids are very toxic (parkinsons) LD50 at only 30 mg/70kg.
Broccoli Extract 1 pill is supposed to be 100g of broccoli tops, but extracts contain only 2 mg sulforaphane and similar compounds at 5 mg. The tests in mice were with 100 mg to 500 mg equivalents. 50 pills seems unreasonable, although 5 kg of broccoli tops is not much more tolerable. Sulforaphane, phenethyl isothiocyanate, and Benzyl-isothiocyanate (0.1 to 0.3 g per 500g) as other cruciferous vegetables and are studied extensively in prevention and moderately in reduction of smokers' lung cancer. Also lung metastasis from breast cancer. Has some flavonoids, but this does not appear to be the main benefit.
Citrus peel and seeds In keeping with the evidence above, similar effects are seen with various citrus compounds, but there are no standardized extracts. 5 g/d of the "Citrus Bioflavonoid Complex" would be good, but this may not be better than simply eating 1 peel per day. The peel and seeds without much of the pulp of just one or two dark oranges, grapefruit, and/or tangerine are probably best. One peel 3 times a day would be best. These are
Flavanones that do not overlap with the other flavonoids listed here.
coconut oil to avoid carbs and increase energy, but not at the expense of fish oils and olive oil.
Vitamin C I.V. in pancreatic cancer mouse model kept
tumors 3 times smaller, but survival was not increased. Similar results in other studies in mice. Good alternative to radiation and chemo treatments that are being used merely to reduce the size of the
tumors and therefore pain but not extend lifespan. Oncologists call this "response" to the treatment, so remember "response" does not mean an increase in lifespan. Same with Vitamin C I.V. The goal is pain reduction without chemo and radiation.
Ginsenoside Rg3 from Ginseng. This is not yet available to the consumer. Ginseng extracts may help since people taking ginseng life-long have much less cancer, but there is not enough reason to believe relatively therapeutic doses can be achieved with current preparations. 0.3g/kg mice (2 g per 70kg person) of lipid soluble ginseng extract stopped 60% lung cancer in mice. 0.1 g/kg had 1/3 the effect and 0.6 g/kg had no extra effect. Another special oral extract 30 times less (0.01 g/kg) showed 50% reduction in lung cancer. A 3rd special extract of 99% ginsenoside Rg3 showed 65% less
tumor volume. Another study in 3 colon cancers indicate injections of 50 mg/kg mice (0.3 g per 70kg person) of the extract from the berry of american ginseng had 65% smaller
tumors and 100% survival. 20 mg/kg injections had very little effect (as with most of these, dose is everything). Ginsenoside Rg3 was the largest component of the American Berry but not root and root had no effect. The berries had to be steamed to get the Rg3 out and un-steamed had none of it and had almost no effect.
Genistein, Soy Phytochemical Concentrate 0.5% in diet (2.5 to 5 g/d) containing genistein reduced bladder metastasis to lung by 95% whereas only 70% for genistein by itself (0.2% diet, 1 to 2 g/d), so other compounds had effect. Both kept initial
tumor sizes to 50% of controls. Genistein also effective in breast cancer even after inoculation at only 0.02% diet. This might be a problem because it usually contains daidzein isoflavone which made
tumors significantly worse in one of the above studies. These
isoflavones do not overlap with the other flavonids. I need to research this one more.
I3C (from broccoli) 1% in diet (30 pills) has large benefit in small cell lung cancer but 0.5% had little effect. Another study showed 70% prevention at 1.8%. Another study used only 0.15% diet in mice to prevent 43% and 83% reduction in
tumor multiplicity and adenocarcinoma. This seems to have stronger evidence than many, especially for prevention of smoker's lung cancer, but it may have a strong effect on estrogen.
GLA 12 g/day, 40 pills, maybe no more effective than fish oil. Only a couple of mice studies.
Beta-sitosterol for prostate and breast cancers. 1% in diet used. Only 2 or 3 mice studies.
IP6 had 50% reduction in prostate
tumor weight at 1% to 2% in drinking water in two studies and 5 fold decrease in skin cancer at 2% when started before inoculation. Has to be in pure form in drinking water, not bound to proteins. The max possibly needed of 20g per day would be $5 a day in powder form. Only 2 or 3 mice studies.
Others being studied but not available: triterpenes lupeol and betulinic acid, ginkolide B. from ginko, luteolin (broccoli-like plants)
Capers as a good food choice: are the best source of have quercetin and kaempferol
(flavonols) with 300 mg/100g. They have been shown independently to have an effect on cancer, but I have not yet researched it well. These are also in green tea. Too much quercetin by itself (pills) may cause depression.
Converting doses from mice to human. 1% in diet and 1% in water for mice is 5 to 10 grams per day for a 2000 calorie person. Converting doses between animals is accurately based on comparing calories consumed because the ultimate goal is to get the same ratio of all compounds ingested. Larger animals use fewer calories per body weight, so they use fewer nutrients per body weight because the turnover in nutrients is slower. For example, the ratios of "RDAs" in mice (and other mammals) to calories consumed is close to the ratios in humans. Mice food is standardized to 4.7 gross kcal/gram, but their ability to digest is about 8% less (4.3 gross kcal/g), so 1% in their diet is 2000/4.3 = 4.7 grams per 2000 calories. Under the right conditions mice can consume twice as much food and water as normal, but this does not necessarily change the needed dose per calorie to fight cancer. Cancer and other cells generally grow faster with higher calorie ingestion so that higher doses of a cancer-fighting nutrient from eating more might be used to offset the faster-growing cancer. But higher calorie ingestion from exercise prevents the extra energy from being wasted on normal and cancerous cells, so it's possible to get a higher dose of nutrients without advancing cancer. So if high-activity mice are compared to sedentary humans, using the percent of a nutrient in diet per calorie might lead to underestimating what humans need. And vice versa. Many sources indicate mice drink about 1 mL for every 1 g of food, which was also stated as an assumption in two research papers. A paper on caffeine and green tea explicitly mentioned 2.5 ml water and 2.5 g water per day were measured in the non-caffeine group. So 1% in drinking water is also 4.7 grams per 2000 calories. The maintenance food intake for a lab mouse is supposed to be 2.3 g/d according to one authoritative source, but 3 g/d is commonly quoted. Using the 2.5 g/d stated in one paper, the FDA's km values for a 20 g mouse with 8% wasted food intake gives 6.5 g/d conversion for a 70 kg person. The km values were designed to be an underestimate of the dose per calorie conversion for toxicity safety reasons and are based simply on assuming surface area determines heat loss and therefore calorie intake. But in the case of comparing humans and mice it appears to be an overestimate. The 4.7 g dose per 2000 calories is supposed to be a gold standard. This assumption can be checked by comparing RDAs per calorie in humans and mice: about 1/3 of the human RDAs are 1.8 to 3 times as much per calorie, 1/3 are about the same, and 1/3 are half as much. So if RDAs are representative of other nutrients and if the RDA data for both species is accurate, using twice the dose per calorie for humans covers most of them while providing 4 times more than needed for some of them. This would be 9.4 g per 2000 calories per 1% in mouse diet or water. Rats who weigh 15 times more than mice have much less variation when compared to humans, and the average of the ratio of RDAs to calories consumed remains the same. So when converting 1% nutrient in food and water for mice to humans, 5 g and 10 g per 2000 calories seem to be "possibly adequate" and "probably adequate". For example, one study on caffeine indicates that either mice are very sensitive to caffeine or that the 5 g per 2000 calories equivalent to 1% in drinking water is to low: they drank 40% more water and at 0.02% that gives a dose equivalent of only 300 mg/d in humans which is only 2 or 3 cups of coffee. The mice had 10% lower body weight and 50% fewer
tumors. If this effect occurs in humans, it would have to be closer to 600 mg/d, giving support for 10 g/d instead of 5 g/d. If the higher dose is correct, people in clinical trials that are based on mouse data are getting half the dose needed and this would result in twice as many cancers compared to mice, all else being equal.
Links
berberine, 8 pills/day, 1 bottle/month, $2/day
http://www.iherb.com...lets/20873?at=0 fish oil, at least 60 ml/day, 6/month, $4.5/day
http://www.iherb.com...00-ml/2796?at=0 pomegranate, 4 pills/day, 4 bottles/month, $2/day
http://www.iherb.com...-Caps/7453?at=0 green tea extract, 12 pills/day, 2 bottles/month, $1/day
http://www.iherb.com...caps/11598?at=0 grape seed extract, 12 pills/day, 4 bottles/month, $2/day
http://www.iherb.com...Vcaps/7240?at=0
fish_oil_lung_50%_reduction.gif 12.51KB
7 downloads
