Apple extract kills colon cancer cells better than chemo drug in latest study

Zoe1
Zoe1 Member Posts: 22

This is interesting and with pubmed to back it up

http://www.naturalnews.com/039680_apples_cancer_cells_chemotherapy.html

 

God bless

Zoe

 

 

Comments

  • Lovekitties
    Lovekitties Member Posts: 3,364 Member
    Old Saying

    An apple a day keeps the doctor away! 

    It would be wonderful if we could actually have positive benifit from something less toxic to the body.. 

    I just wonder how many you would need to create an overall "cure" or "significant benifit".

    Marie who loves kitties

     

     

  • John23
    John23 Member Posts: 2,122
    Anything can kill a cancer cell!

     

    Te problem is….. that there isn’t any present technology to target a cancer cell specifically….

     

    To date, only our immune system is capable of doing that task; for those of us susceptible to cancer, we just have to figure out how teach our immune system to do what everyone else’s does naturally.

     

    Best wishes.

     

    John

     

    (try Traditional Chinese Medicine, it might just work for you too!)

     

     

     

     

  • fighting_ big_c
    fighting_ big_c Member Posts: 64
    John23 said:

    Anything can kill a cancer cell!

     

    Te problem is….. that there isn’t any present technology to target a cancer cell specifically….

     

    To date, only our immune system is capable of doing that task; for those of us susceptible to cancer, we just have to figure out how teach our immune system to do what everyone else’s does naturally.

     

    Best wishes.

     

    John

     

    (try Traditional Chinese Medicine, it might just work for you too!)

     

     

     

     

    I wish

    I wish that these cures soon be discovered. I found these foods to be riched in oligosaccharides. Maybe we can incorporate them in our food plan chicory roots, jerusalem artichokes, onions, asparagus and jicama.

  • Deena11
    Deena11 Member Posts: 199
    Apples

    Wonder if the agents in this study included the apple seeds and how much those contributed to the positive results?

  • fighting_ big_c
    fighting_ big_c Member Posts: 64
    Deena11 said:

    Apples

    Wonder if the agents in this study included the apple seeds and how much those contributed to the positive results?

    DEENA

    Hey Deena. I have been thinking about you. How are you? My mom started her chemo 2 days ago. So far she's feeling a little bit nauseous. She asks me a lot about what to expect from the medications she is currently taking. I hope you are better. How is your mom?

  • Deena11
    Deena11 Member Posts: 199

    DEENA

    Hey Deena. I have been thinking about you. How are you? My mom started her chemo 2 days ago. So far she's feeling a little bit nauseous. She asks me a lot about what to expect from the medications she is currently taking. I hope you are better. How is your mom?

    I'm doing well, thanks!!

    I'm doing well...thanks!  Getting my colonoscopy next Friday (5th) to see if there is any evidence of the disease visible.  It is supposed to be my yearly follow-up from the one I had in December 2011 that found he cancer.  I'm a bit nervous, of course.  I am feeling better the longer I get away from my last treatment (September).  Right after treatment. I had awful pain in both of my shoulders.  This happened AFTER I finished but now they are almost back to normal.  I still have the numb fingertips and numb feet (toes).  These symptoms only occurred after I completed my chemo treatments.  All in all, I feel great.  Please let your mom know, it may be rough but she can get through it.   If you would have told me a year ago today if I would feel this good, I wouldn't have believed you!

    My mom still wants to help me (she lives out of state) but I call her about every other day so she can "help" me with her loving words.  Since I was unable to visit my parents while I was sick, I went there for two weeks at Christmas, at the beginning of February, and plan on going there (to Ohio) in May.  I want to make up for scaring them so much last year (hee hee).

    Hope your mom is holding up.  It is just the beginning but having you there will mean the world to her.  She will probably need a hug now and them, a squeeze on her hand, and a kleenex now and then.  Like I said before, she is lucky to have a such supportive and caring daughter!

  • PhillieG
    PhillieG Member Posts: 4,866
    John23 said:

    Anything can kill a cancer cell!

     

    Te problem is….. that there isn’t any present technology to target a cancer cell specifically….

     

    To date, only our immune system is capable of doing that task; for those of us susceptible to cancer, we just have to figure out how teach our immune system to do what everyone else’s does naturally.

     

    Best wishes.

     

    John

     

    (try Traditional Chinese Medicine, it might just work for you too!)

     

     

     

     

    Even an AK47?

    I guess it's just semantics because it certainly seems that there are targeted therapies in use unless you're talking about targeting one very specific cancer kept in a #2 mayonnaise jar on Funk and Wagnall's porch since noon today...

    I agree that our immune systems are important and usually are capable of doing the task but they get damaged somehow and that allows the cancer to occur.
    I've been on targeted therapies for years (Avastin and Erbitux) and they've done well for me.

    Targeted Cancer Therapies

    Key Points

    • Targeted cancer therapies are drugs or other substances that block the growth and spread of cancer by interfering with specific molecules involved in tumor growth and progression.
    • Because scientists call these specific molecules “molecular targets,” therapies that interfere with them are sometimes called “molecularly targeted drugs,” “molecularly targeted therapies,” or other similar names.
    • Targeted cancer therapies that have been approved for use in specific cancers include drugs that interfere with cell growth signaling or tumor blood vessel development, promote the specific death of cancer cells, stimulate the immune system to destroy specific cancer cells, and deliver toxic drugs to cancer cells.


    From NCI website

  • John23
    John23 Member Posts: 2,122
    PhillieG said:

    Even an AK47?

    I guess it's just semantics because it certainly seems that there are targeted therapies in use unless you're talking about targeting one very specific cancer kept in a #2 mayonnaise jar on Funk and Wagnall's porch since noon today...

    I agree that our immune systems are important and usually are capable of doing the task but they get damaged somehow and that allows the cancer to occur.
    I've been on targeted therapies for years (Avastin and Erbitux) and they've done well for me.

    Targeted Cancer Therapies

    Key Points

    • Targeted cancer therapies are drugs or other substances that block the growth and spread of cancer by interfering with specific molecules involved in tumor growth and progression.
    • Because scientists call these specific molecules “molecular targets,” therapies that interfere with them are sometimes called “molecularly targeted drugs,” “molecularly targeted therapies,” or other similar names.
    • Targeted cancer therapies that have been approved for use in specific cancers include drugs that interfere with cell growth signaling or tumor blood vessel development, promote the specific death of cancer cells, stimulate the immune system to destroy specific cancer cells, and deliver toxic drugs to cancer cells.


    From NCI website

    Targeted Cancer Therapies:

     

    Nearly all of the targeted cancer therapies are listed here:

    http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Therapy/targeted

     

    Unfortunately, the facts remain:

     

    "A typical in vitro study of targeted anticancer drug delivery is

    based on cultured human cancer cells which express a unique

    surface marker specifically selected to test the targeted

    delivery strategy being examined. Cytotoxicity is commonly

    examined by the addition of a drug delivery system directly to

    cells grown as a monolayer or in suspension. Such studies produce

    a dose–response curve with an IC50 (the concentration needed to

    inhibit 50% cell growth) of an anticancer agent under these in

    vitro conditions. The IC50 values determined from the in vitro

    studies, however, are found to be difficult to predict

    therapeutic efficacy in clinical settings [4].

     

    Initial in vivo testing of most targeted drug delivery

    technologies are performed using human cancer cell xenografts

    established in severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID) mice

    [4,5]. Alternately, mice having specific genetic alteration which

    leads to the onset of an oncogenic event are used [4,5]. Reports

    in the literature commonly describe drug delivery systems that

    show a substantial, and thus promising, decrease in tumor size.

    In most of these studies, however, there is an incomplete

    eradication of these solid tumors and tumor size rapidly

    increases once the treatment has been stopped [6]. Consistent

    with these observations in small animal models, there has been

    little, if any, translation of promising in vivo outcomes to

    studies in man [7]."

    (From here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3272876/ )

     

    Some interesting information is also here:

    http://cancergrace.org/cancer-101/2008/09/11/targeted-rx-and-side-effects/

     

    I wish cancer research would produce a way to successfully target cancer cells specifically, but to date there is no capability to do that. There are indeed treatments that may help in one’s specific fight against cancerous tumors, but even then, what works for one, may not work for another.

     

    With all present therapy, good cells are damaged along with the damaged cells. The fact remains, that a damaged good cell can turn into a “cancer cell” in those of us whose immune systems do not properly identify a damaged cell and fails to remove it. It is the reason that all present cancer fighting chemicals (chemo) are considered to be carcinogenic. Any chemical that can damage a good cell, can be classified as a carcinogenic.

     

    Drugs such as Cetuximab are a type of drug known as a monoclonal antibody; It is not a chemotherapy drug.

     

    The manufacturer and the industry do not classify those type drugs as “chemotherapy” drugs. The manufacturers of those type drugs are not compelled (required) to test for their carcinogenic effects, and have not thus far.

     

    The concept of modern day medicine, is that the good must outweigh the bad, It is no longer of the belief that “first, do no harm”, it is to “do less harm than good, if possible”.

     

    We’re all in this fight together. I may not have had signs of cancer since taking the herbs I used, but I suffer all the pains and repercussions of surgical resections due to that original cancer, and all the subsequent operations since 2006. There remains the very fact, that cancer is still within me somewhere, waiting for any weakness that will allow it to grow. With only 25% of my intestinal tract remaining, my weakness worsens as time passes.

     

    There is no guarantee that the herbs I had used will work again, and I never boxed myself in regarding any therapy; I’m hoping for some sort of a great advancement as much as anyone else.

     

    But if one does not remain skeptical and questions everything presented, one can become complacent and fall into an industrial vacuum that managed to suck the life from most of our friends.

     

    Always get second opinions, and third and fourth opinions; never take the word of one.

     

    Life is too short to lose it to complacency.

     

    Better health wishes to all,

     

    John

     

  • steved
    steved Member Posts: 834
    The studies

    This is interesting but if you click on the links of the articles they reference for pubmed none of them describe a comparison tO a chemo drug as the article promises and no studies are even in animals- all in vitro test tube stuff which is a long way off showing any clinical value.

    However, no one would doubt the value of eating raw fruit for general healtreason it's, so munch on!

    Steve

  • PhillieG
    PhillieG Member Posts: 4,866
    steved said:

    The studies

    This is interesting but if you click on the links of the articles they reference for pubmed none of them describe a comparison tO a chemo drug as the article promises and no studies are even in animals- all in vitro test tube stuff which is a long way off showing any clinical value.

    However, no one would doubt the value of eating raw fruit for general healtreason it's, so munch on!

    Steve

    Fruits & Veggies

    Too bad Monsanto is destroying the food industry and controls almost ALL of the seeds on Earth.. I enjoy and agree with eating fresh fruits. Get 'em while you can!

  • PhillieG
    PhillieG Member Posts: 4,866
    John23 said:

    Targeted Cancer Therapies:

     

    Nearly all of the targeted cancer therapies are listed here:

    http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Therapy/targeted

     

    Unfortunately, the facts remain:

     

    "A typical in vitro study of targeted anticancer drug delivery is

    based on cultured human cancer cells which express a unique

    surface marker specifically selected to test the targeted

    delivery strategy being examined. Cytotoxicity is commonly

    examined by the addition of a drug delivery system directly to

    cells grown as a monolayer or in suspension. Such studies produce

    a dose–response curve with an IC50 (the concentration needed to

    inhibit 50% cell growth) of an anticancer agent under these in

    vitro conditions. The IC50 values determined from the in vitro

    studies, however, are found to be difficult to predict

    therapeutic efficacy in clinical settings [4].

     

    Initial in vivo testing of most targeted drug delivery

    technologies are performed using human cancer cell xenografts

    established in severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID) mice

    [4,5]. Alternately, mice having specific genetic alteration which

    leads to the onset of an oncogenic event are used [4,5]. Reports

    in the literature commonly describe drug delivery systems that

    show a substantial, and thus promising, decrease in tumor size.

    In most of these studies, however, there is an incomplete

    eradication of these solid tumors and tumor size rapidly

    increases once the treatment has been stopped [6]. Consistent

    with these observations in small animal models, there has been

    little, if any, translation of promising in vivo outcomes to

    studies in man [7]."

    (From here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3272876/ )

     

    Some interesting information is also here:

    http://cancergrace.org/cancer-101/2008/09/11/targeted-rx-and-side-effects/

     

    I wish cancer research would produce a way to successfully target cancer cells specifically, but to date there is no capability to do that. There are indeed treatments that may help in one’s specific fight against cancerous tumors, but even then, what works for one, may not work for another.

     

    With all present therapy, good cells are damaged along with the damaged cells. The fact remains, that a damaged good cell can turn into a “cancer cell” in those of us whose immune systems do not properly identify a damaged cell and fails to remove it. It is the reason that all present cancer fighting chemicals (chemo) are considered to be carcinogenic. Any chemical that can damage a good cell, can be classified as a carcinogenic.

     

    Drugs such as Cetuximab are a type of drug known as a monoclonal antibody; It is not a chemotherapy drug.

     

    The manufacturer and the industry do not classify those type drugs as “chemotherapy” drugs. The manufacturers of those type drugs are not compelled (required) to test for their carcinogenic effects, and have not thus far.

     

    The concept of modern day medicine, is that the good must outweigh the bad, It is no longer of the belief that “first, do no harm”, it is to “do less harm than good, if possible”.

     

    We’re all in this fight together. I may not have had signs of cancer since taking the herbs I used, but I suffer all the pains and repercussions of surgical resections due to that original cancer, and all the subsequent operations since 2006. There remains the very fact, that cancer is still within me somewhere, waiting for any weakness that will allow it to grow. With only 25% of my intestinal tract remaining, my weakness worsens as time passes.

     

    There is no guarantee that the herbs I had used will work again, and I never boxed myself in regarding any therapy; I’m hoping for some sort of a great advancement as much as anyone else.

     

    But if one does not remain skeptical and questions everything presented, one can become complacent and fall into an industrial vacuum that managed to suck the life from most of our friends.

     

    Always get second opinions, and third and fourth opinions; never take the word of one.

     

    Life is too short to lose it to complacency.

     

    Better health wishes to all,

     

    John

     

    So it is semantics...

    "Drugs such as Cetuximab are a type of drug known as a monoclonal antibody; It is not a chemotherapy drug.". But what is chemotherapy? Isn't it Chemical Therapy?

    It's interesting because my source for my previous post is from the exact same source as the link you posted John. http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Therapy/targeted. Thank God I'm not a mouse! One can read data and see the glass as half-full, half-empty, or just as polluted water...Same article, I just focused on the drugs I used and had positive results while you focused on the negative. Interesting isn't it?

    "Cetuximab (Erbitux®) is a monoclonal antibody that is approved to treat some patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck or colorectal cancer. The drug binds to the external portion of EGFR, thereby preventing the receptor from being activated by growth signals, which may inhibit signal transduction and lead to antiproliferative effects"

    "Other targeted therapies block the growth of blood vessels to tumors (angiogenesis). To grow beyond a certain size, tumors must obtain a blood supply to get the oxygen and nutrients needed for continued growth. Treatments that interfere with angiogenesis may block tumor growth.
    Bevacizumab (Avastin®) is a monoclonal antibody that is approved for the treatment of glioblastoma. The therapy is also approved to treat some patients with non-small cell lung cancer, metastatic colorectal cancer, and metastatic kidney cancer. Bevacizumab binds to VEGF and prevents it from interacting with receptors on endothelial cells, blocking a step that is necessary for the initiation of new blood vessel growth."

    I don't doubt that certain herbs/plants (which really are the source of nearly all medicine) can be effective. Unfortunately, there really seems to be little aside from anecdotal stories touting their success. I truely wish that more money was given for those studies so that people can consider more options and have somewhat reliable data to look at. Maybe the groups like SU2C will throw some $$$ in that direction.

    NOTE: Interestingly, reading your first quoted selections the section you quoted from goes on to say in the third and last paragraph in the section.. "It is thought that the somatic adult stem cells of the organs survive the chemotherapy and are able to replace healthy cells lost due to these protocols. Could cancer cell recurrence be similar to the recovery process of normal healthy cells? If so, do we need to target the cancer stem cells and how could this be done effectively? Thus, complete cancer cell eradication may be possible using treatments that effectively target both cancer cells and their progenitor stem cells. As stem cells for various tissue cell types do not always reside in that tissue or organ [8], the strategies to effectively target drugs to both tumor and non-tumor sites may be what is required." You left out the Light at the end of the Tunnel from exactly the same article you quoted to knock down targeted therapies. Any reason why? Because it showed promise?

    I really don't understand your distain for Western Medicine John. Seeing how you left out the possible positive outcomes really makes me question your ongoing quest here but to each their own and we ALL have agendas here

    Be well...

  • coloCan
    coloCan Member Posts: 1,944 Member
    PhillieG said:

    Fruits & Veggies

    Too bad Monsanto is destroying the food industry and controls almost ALL of the seeds on Earth.. I enjoy and agree with eating fresh fruits. Get 'em while you can!

    speaking of which......

    how safe can herbal substances from China really be considering the amount of poisons on crops grown in US? Is there any SAFE,unadulterated food anywhere on this planet? Don't tell me there are no pesticides on "organic" crops-its in the air,land and water regardless.....just less on organics than corporate-grown stuff. Even cows and chickens have been made toxic by all the antibiotics given them,let alone the pesticides in their feed....Wake up if you don't knoiw what Monsanto and its cohorts have done with the consent of our gov't here. 

    PS anyone aware of whats happening to bee colonies,needed for around 25% of US crops? or fracking and potential danger to water supplies(there is more secrecy here than with any national defense agency and no leakage either!!!!!)

    PSS actually, its more than just TCM herbs from China; i think many of the ingredients for supplements made in US are from China as well ......I'm questioning "quality control" and "purity"

  • PhillieG
    PhillieG Member Posts: 4,866
    coloCan said:

    speaking of which......

    how safe can herbal substances from China really be considering the amount of poisons on crops grown in US? Is there any SAFE,unadulterated food anywhere on this planet? Don't tell me there are no pesticides on "organic" crops-its in the air,land and water regardless.....just less on organics than corporate-grown stuff. Even cows and chickens have been made toxic by all the antibiotics given them,let alone the pesticides in their feed....Wake up if you don't knoiw what Monsanto and its cohorts have done with the consent of our gov't here. 

    PS anyone aware of whats happening to bee colonies,needed for around 25% of US crops? or fracking and potential danger to water supplies(there is more secrecy here than with any national defense agency and no leakage either!!!!!)

    PSS actually, its more than just TCM herbs from China; i think many of the ingredients for supplements made in US are from China as well ......I'm questioning "quality control" and "purity"

    If We Can Survive Cancer

    everything else will get us...

    I would question everything that comes from China since they are even more lax than we are with poisoning our food supply.

    A FrankenFood bill was just passed riding on the coattails of a Veterans Benefit Bill. One has to LOVE how they attach riders to very patriotic sounding bills in order to sneak them through. Like the good old Citizens United. A very Citizen-sounding name yet it allowed corporations to be considered a person. As someone said "I'll believe that corporations are people when Texas executes one". We are allowing ourselves to be slowly killed by corporations. And yes, we need bees yet the Monsanto's FrankenSeeds are Roundup Resistant now but unfortunately, it screws up the bees.
    To Bee, or not to Bee?