Dear visitor, this is a machine-translated article. It makes perfect sense in its original language (Czech), and is fully backed by independent scientific literature. The translation, though, is far from perfect and takes patience and imagination, if you decide to read it.

Drobečková navigace

HER2 + breast cancer 3

Hello

I would now like to "put forward in a few paragraphs a fairly comprehensive answer":

First of all, although I am currently working on an institute that focuses mainly on oncology treatment, I am not really oncologists myself. My original profession was actually a "craft" = neurosurgery, whose success lies, in addition to specific theoretical knowledge, primarily on manual work. For almost ten years after my injury to radiosurgery (radiation neurosurgery), I co-got "from the oncology", but I still consider myself in the oncology problematic as a very layman. However, because the urgency of my wife's illness forced me to search for "solution" as quickly as possible, "surf" the Internet and if I find something interesting there, I try to intuitively separate "weed." One of the means I have not hinted at so far is also the spouse's daily consumption of a spoonful of hotly prepared blends of maple syrup and edible soda. There are a few things I do not "fit", but on the other hand, I feel that consuming the mixture should not "go wrong". The source from which I drew, I attach. In addition to adjusting the pH (and mixtures of maple syrup / soda), I've also come across other "guaranteed" types of cancer, and I can see, for example, amygdalin, in my utmost confidence. Therefore, I also include another of my sources of information, where other methods are taken over. If you ever write to me what you think of them, they will certainly not be offended.

MUDr. Martin M.

HER2 + breast cancer 3:

Ad Maple Syrup

Note that I ( in my previous reply ) avoided the criticism of maple syrup / sap, but I was also inclined to include blueberries , birch sap, and Inonotus obliquus . Maple sap is not without effect and may help a bit against tumors ( Legault2010aai ). The "Bicarbonate Maple Cancer Treatment" document you sent me for review is just a pile of pseudoscientific fantasies, and the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of maple syrup actually does not say anything at all. You probably feel it yourself and I confirm it to you.

Ad amygdalin / laetril / vitamin B 17

Amygdalin is a simple molecule that is nothing but a source of cyanide. It is used to make the apricot seeds not eaten but discarded and let them grow other apricots. Of course, the idea is that we can selectively poison the cancer cells by cyanide. But this is not possible because cyanide has the ability to selectively kill only some cells at all. The mitochondria, which they eliminate, are backed up by glycolysis. Cyanide kills the whole body with a global energy shortage. This is exactly the same situation as it is not possible to starve an undesirable village by blowing out a local supermarket because the villagers bring food around. Until the overall shortage of food in the state would be effective, but we do not want it.

Any attempts to use more glucose, energy, etc. in the fight against cancer cells, that they have higher metabolism, are useless because they do not differ fundamentally from healthy cells. The brain, the heart, the kidneys, the liver are highly metabolized ... The charlatans around these treatments are perpetuum mobile inventors : stubborn, often self-sacrificed, but with the advantage that they often find enough desperate patients who are willing Fantasy to share and finance. Pharmaceutical empires are also scolding.

You will not miss the moon by the stone

The concept of attack on cancer cells despite its high metabolism is weak, scientifically unacceptable. It's like trying to hit the moon with a stone. This is theoretically possible, but practically not. If the asteroid of the Little Prince had a planet of comparable size, the Little Prince could have fun with watching the sunrise even by storming the rocks. But the idea of throwing stones from Earth to the Moon is, as you know, pointless. We are able to judge this intuitively because we have practical experience with stones. Such a plan would not have been sold to us. But when we move from the world of stones to the world of molecules, we are no longer sure whether cancer cells can or can not be destroyed by feeding a source of cyanide. Maybe I've spent much time on the streaming of the stones for months, but I'm demonstrating that even nonsense can be written in a mundane way. And that is also my comment on the second document you sent about amygdalin and laetrile, incorrectly called "vitamin B 17 ".

You need a rocket

If you do not want to surrender to the will of fate, and all you want to do is touch the moon, I have a tip for you: Combine that trastuzumab with an alpha emitter. Compared to plain trastuzumab, it would have the advantage that those neighboring cancer cells that did not express the HER2 receptor would be affected as well. Such a conjugate is not commonly sold, so it is either to be ordered from one hand or manufactured separately. This is not easy, but unlike amygdalin treatment, it is not entirely impossible. So if you want to spend it.

Detailed instructions

Go to the library and borrow the book Bioconjugate Techniques . You will find page 783, chapter "Antibody Modification and Conjugation", and you will go there. You will sit down behind the keyboard to find out which cells in the body, under physiological conditions, express the HER2 receptor and at what concentrations. You will concentrate on the three most important populations of these cells. For them, do you want to solve this problem: What can be the maximum alpha emitter with a short half-life in a given tissue to survive 90% of the cells at its complete disintegration? The three concentrations of α-emitters that come out in this way will be divided by three concentrations of HER2 receptors in the given tissues and you will select the smallest of these three. This number should not be too small, certainly not much smaller than 1, but it should not be too large.

In the next step, select the appropriate radionuclide. It should be a pure alpha emitter with a short half-life. The shorter half-life is better from the therapeutic point of view, but with such isotopes it is less well manipulated. For example, radium 223 ( 223 Ra, Nilsson2005fce ) has a half - life of 12 days and is almost pure a radiator: 223 Ra - α (12 days) => 219 Rn - α ( instantly ) => 211 Pb - β (30 minutes) => 211 Bi - a immediately => 207 Tl - β (instantaneous) => 208 Pb (stable). You have four wounds α (β not count, you are extra) so the number you have previously calculated is divided by four. The result will give you the number of radio atoms 223 that you need to attach to each molecule of HER2 of the antibody (trastazumab). If you choose another radionuclide, the number of α particles may be different. According to Dadachova2010ctw, consider, for example, bismuth 212 ( 212 Bi), bismuth 213 ( 213 Bi), actinium 211 ( 211 Ac) what you get.

Book the Bioconjugate Technique book where the bend is rounded and select the appropriate method to attach the calculated number of nucleotide atoms per trastazumab molecule. If there are too many, you have to make a tassel. But so many of them may not be. Order the required linkers, under the aegis of an authorized Nuclide Laboratory, which is certainly not far away from your workplace, order the selected radionuclide, pour it into the antibody tube, mix well, let it react, clean the column from unreacted liners, uncontaminated nuclides and other trash, dissolve In physiological solution and you can drink. Do not forget to use ginseng to reduce radiation damage to normal cells.

Then describe your success to Current Radiopharmaceuticals, whose No. 3 of September 2008 was just the methods as a targeted radiation attack on HER2 positive cells dedicated to and the effectiveness of this strategy confirms, find it there. Here, in Sweden ( Tolmachev2007rth ), those HER2 antibodies again tested adhesive luteum 177 ( 177 Lu). Otherwise, there is somebody on the radio (it was called Alpharadin, Liepe2009a2a ), but it is unlikely that your patient would care to put it on trastuzumab because of her, they could go to jail.

That is all.

-Boris-

It takes only a few days to absorb new findings and to find out how to respond to them. However, I would be wondering if the pure alpha-emitter linked to trastuzumab should be applied multiple times or only once. Trastuzumab should be infused for 3 weeks until the baseline progression. Oncology and I see this as a problem because the cavalry catheter has been canceled for six cycles of chemotherapy has been canceled, for an increased vulnerability of the upper limb on the mastectomy / axenum exenterment side, no infusions should be given on it, the vessels of the opposite The side has a "miserable" + environment where it should have. Treatment with trastuzumab, I find it problematic even from a psychologist. Aspect.

Regards, MUDr. Martin M.

Tastuzumab works by targeting the target cells to destruction by the host's immune system. Another mechanism of action may be that the surface of the cells on the surface prevents the adherent antibody from growing in growth. In any case, this antibody restricts / kills only those cells that HER2 is carrying on their surface directly. Not far from all. Finally, in the event of unsuccessful trastuzumab therapy, it becomes lawful that cancer cells learn HER2 to not express and help without it.

The advantage of targeted radiotherapy would be that radiation would hit a hundred microns circle around HER2 clusters expressing cells. However, you have touched a big problem that I completely neglected in my half-serious manual, and that is dosing. For the correct dose, it would be necessary to accurately estimate the amount of HER2 receptor expressed in the body, and the antibody combined with the alpha emitter would ideally be given in stoichiometric amounts. It would be ideal to give it exactly one-time dosing and calculate the radiation dose exactly so that the radionuclide completely fired cells undergoing mitosis around HER2-positive tissue and did not completely destroy the tissues expressing HER2 naturally. It does not make sense twice, because if it does not destroy the cancer cells for the first time, then in the second attempt, the survivors will be more. It's like spending cockroaches - once and for all.

In addition to HER2, it would be particularly advantageous to find additional receptors specific for the cancer cells that could produce even more potent cytotoxic therapy. But this is not realistic in this case. We can continue to communicate by phone.

-Boris-

| 7.7.2011

Related articles