Simple Sugar, Lactate, Is Like ‘Candy for Cancer Cells’: Cancer Cells Accelerate Aging and Inflammation in the Body to Drive Tumor Growth
ScienceDaily (May 28, 2011) — Researchers at the Kimmel Cancer Center at Jefferson have shed new light on the longstanding conundrum about what makes a tumor grow — and how to make it stop. Interestingly, cancer cells accelerate the aging of nearby connective tissue cells to cause inflammation, which ultimately provides “fuel” for the tumor to grow and even metastasize.–This revealing symbiotic process, which is similar to how muscle and brain cells communicate with the body, could prove useful for developing new drugs to prevent and treat cancers. In this simple model, our bodies provide nourishment for the cancer cells, via chronic inflammation.–“People think that inflammation drives cancer, but they never understood the mechanism,” said Michael P. Lisanti, M.D., Ph.D., Professor and Chair of Stem Cell Biology & Regenerative Medicine at Jefferson Medical College of Thomas Jefferson University and a member of the Kimmel Cancer Center. “What we found is that cancer cells are accelerating aging and inflammation, which is making high-energy nutrients to feed cancer cells.”–In normal aging, DNA is damaged and the body begins to deteriorate because of oxidative stress. “We are all slowly rusting, like the Tin-man in the Wizard of Oz,” Dr. Lisanti said. “And there is a very similar process going on in the tumor’s local environment.” Interestingly, cancer cells induce “oxidative stress,” the rusting process, in normal connective tissue, in order to extract vital nutrients.–Dr. Lisanti and his team previously discovered that cancer cells induce this type of stress response (autophagy) in nearby cells, to feed themselves and grow. However, the mechanism by which the cancer cells induce this stress and, more importantly, the relationship between the connective tissue and how this “energy” is transferred was unclear.–“Nobody fully understands the link between aging and cancer,” said Dr. Lisanti, who used pre-clinical models, as well as tumors from breast cancer patients, to study these mechanisms. “What we see now is that as you age, your whole body becomes more sensitive to this parasitic cancer mechanism, and the cancer cells selectively accelerate the aging process via inflammation in the connective tissue.”–This helps explain why cancers exist in people of all ages, but susceptibility increases as you age. If aggressive enough, cancer cells can induce accelerated aging in the tumor, regardless of age, to speed up the process.–The researchers’ findings are being published online June 1st in the journal Cell Cycle in three separate papers.–One paper analyzes the gene profiles of the laser-captured connective tissue, associated with lethal tumors, in human breast cancer patients. In this paper, lethal cancers show the same gene expression pattern associated with normal aging, as well as Alzheimer’s disease. In fact, these aging and Alzheimer’s disease signatures can identify which breast cancer patients will undergo metastasis. The researchers find that oxidative stress is a common “driver” for both dementia and cancer cell spreading.–In another study, the researchers explain that cancer cells initiate a “lactate shuttle” to move lactate — the “food” — from the connective tissue to the cancer cells. There’s a transporter that is “spilling” lactate from the connective tissue and a transporter that then “gobbles” it up in the cancer cells.”-The implication is that the fibroblasts in the connective tissue are feeding cancer cells directly via pumps, called MCT1 and MCT4, or mono-carboxylate transporters. The researchers see that lactate is like “candy” for cancer cells. And cancer cells are addicted to this supply of “candy.”–“We’ve essentially shown for the first time that there is lactate shuttle in human tumors,” said Dr. Lisanti. “It was first discovered nearly 100 years ago in muscles, 15 years ago in the brain, and now we’ve shown this shuttle also exists in human tumors.”–It’s all the same mechanism, where one cell type literally “feeds” the other. The cancer cells are the “Queen Bees,” and the connective tissue cells are the “Worker Bees.” In this analogy, the “Queen Bees” use aging and inflammation as the signal to tell the “Worker Bees” to make more food.–Researchers also identified MCT4 as a biomarker for oxidative stress in cancer-associated fibroblasts, and inhibiting it could be a powerful new anti-cancer therapy.–“If lethal cancer is a disease of “accelerated aging” in the tumor’s connective tissue, then cancer patients may benefit from therapy with strong antioxidants and anti-inflammatory drugs,” said Dr. Lisanti. “Antioxidant therapy will “cut off the fuel supply” for cancer cells.” Antioxidants also have a natural anti-inflammatory action.–Story Source-The above story is reprinted (with editorial adaptations by ScienceDaily staff) from materials provided by Thomas Jefferson University, via EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.–Journal References-Diana Whitaker-Menezes, Ubaldo E. Martinez-Outschoorn, Zhao Lin, Adam Ertel, Neal Flomenberg, Agnieszka K. Witkiewicz, Ruth C. Birbe, Anthony Howell, Stephanos Pavlides, Ricardo Gandara, Richard G. Pestell, Federica Sotgia, Nancy J. Philp and Michael P. Lisanti. Evidence for a stromal-epithelial ‘lactate shuttle’ in human tumors: MCT4 is a marker of oxidative stress in cancer-associated fibroblasts. Cell Cycle, 2011; 10 (11): 1772-1783 [link] –Ubaldo E. Martinez-Outschoorn, Diana Whitaker-Menezes, Zhao Lin, Neal Flomenberg, Anthony Howell, Richard G. Pestell, Federica Sotgia and Michael P. Lisanti. Cytokine production and inflammation drive autophagy in the tumor microenvironment: Role of stromal caveolin-1 as a key regulator. Cell Cycle, 2011; 10 (11): 1784-1793 [link] –Agnieszka K. Witkiewicz, Jessica Kline, Maria Queenan, Jonathan R. Brody, Aristotelis Tsirigos, Erhan Bilal, Stephanos Pavlides, Adam Ertel, Federica Sotgia and Michael P. Lisanti. Molecular profiling of a lethal tumor microenvironment, as defined by stromal caveolin-1 status in breast cancers. Cell Cycle, 2011; 10 (11): 1794-1809 [link]
Heart Disease Deaths Four Times Higher With Low Salt Intake
Maybe you are among the fortunate few who enjoyed salty seasoned meals, defying all medical warnings and nagging from your friends and family. The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) is changing their tune about salt intake. Natural health professionals have long valued salt for cardiovascular balance among other benefits. JAMA will publish a study that shows that people with greater salt intake are the ones more likely to avoid hypertension, heart disease and death. Doctors never really could explain why they believed lower salt intake would improve heart health. But don’t expect convention doctors to sing the praises of salt any time soon
Heart Disease Deaths Four Times Higher With Low Salt Intake: JAMA Study
As Gaia Health has informed you, there is no truth to the claim that high salt intake is unhealthy. In fact, evidence shows the opposite to be true. Forget all those claims that you need to keep your salt intake low to maintain heart health. It isn’t true. Those claims have been based on deeply flawed studies and the medical establishment’s enforcement of lock-step obedience to whatever the current orders happen to be. Right now, one of them is that lower salt intake is healthy for everyone. The reality is exactly the opposite for most people. Today, the Journal of the American Medical Association(JAMA) is publishing a study of 3,681 people that correlated their salt intake with hypertension and cardiovascular disease and death. The results are clear: People with greater salt intake have significantly less heart disease and death from it. The authors concluded: The associations between systolic pressure and sodium excretion did not translate into less morbidity or improved survival. On the contrary, low sodium excretion predicted higher cardiovascular mortality. Taken together, our current findings refute the estimates of computer models of lives saved and health care costs reduced with lower salt intake. They do also [sic] not support the current recommendations of a generalized and indiscriminate reduction of salt intake at the population level. However, they do not negate the blood pressure-lowering effects of a dietary salt reduction in hypertensive patients Notice, also, that lowering blood pressure is not beneficial to health, though that claim is also routinely made. As the JAMA study shows, a slight decrease in blood pressure occurs with lowered salt intake; it’s nominal and entirely unrelated to outcomes .Trial participants were followed for a median of 7.9 years. Overall, the death rates were: Independence of the Study The study, entitled “Fatal and Nonfatal Outcomes, Incidence of Hypertension, and Blood Pressure Changes in Relation to Urinary Sodium Excretion”, did not suffer from the common flaws of many, if not most, medical studies. It wasn’t financed by Big Pharma. None of the authors received money from Big Pharma or industries related to the topic studied. There were no ghost authors; the researchers who drafted the manuscript are specified. The researchers named first and last in the credits, Katarzyna Stolarz-Skrzypek, MD, PhD and Jan A. Staessen, MD, PhD for the European Project on Genes in Hypertension, were both the research leaders and the actual authors. How Are Estimates of Death Rates from Salt Intake Generally Made? Of course, we’re all aware of just how consistently we’re told that lower salt intake improves heart health. But how do you suppose they come up with the estimates that supposedly prove it? It’s done by magic, of course! As the study’s authors point out, presumptions are fed into computer models, which grind out predefined results of “lives saved”. The claims are based on bits being tossed around inside computer chips, not on real-life data. Furious Response from Mainstream Medicos As might be expected, mainstream medical so-called experts are furious about the study. According to reporting by Lisa Nainggolan of theHeart.org, Dr. Graham MacGregor, of Queen Mary University, London, a low-salt promoter who has managed to con the entire UK nation into reducing food salt content, the findings are “paradoxical” and, therefore, cannot be trusted. He stated: They’ve shown that salt puts up blood pressure, and yet they then claim that salt relates inversely to events. Well, that doesn’t make sense…[It illustrates] the bias of the authors, in my view. Everything else that has been shown to lower BP is beneficial in terms of heart attacks and strokes. He further stated that the paper is “badly written” and has “severe methodological problem, and continued with: I really don’t think this is worth paying attention to. They are trying to create a stir. This is clever, but it’s harmful in my view. It’s like saying we don’t think cigarettes are harmful so we shouldn’t do anything about smoking. The overall evidence [in favor of salt reduction] is overwhelming. That isn’t to say we wouldn’t change our mind if we had really good evidence, but I don’t think this is it. This will not divert us from reducing salt intake worldwide. At a high-level meeting of the World Health Organization, salt reduction has been recommended as the next thing after tobacco reduction because it’s so cost-effective to implement and so easy to do. MacGregor uses typical methods of obfuscating. He attacks the quality of the study, but offers little to support his assertion. He makes sweeping claims without supporting them. He then falls back on one of the grand standards for those who don’t really have good evidence to support their contentions: They make clear that their view is the popular one. In the end, MacGregor states that, even if the study were “perfectly done” it wouldn’t make any difference, because there are so many that support his point of view. What he doesn’t mention is how deeply flawed those studies are. As I discussed in Take a Grain of Salt With That Salt Reduction Advice, careful analysis of most of those studies shows that they tend to cherry-pick data, while meta analysis of the data itself shows the same results as this study.
Turning Differing Views Into Heresy
The danger inherent in rigidly held beliefs by entrenched health powers is clearly revealed here. Modern medicine’s focus on treating disease, rather than on maintaining health, has resulted in promotion of many false claims, with obvious negative effects on the well-being of people. It has become virtual heresy to suggest that any claims by modern medicine are incorrect. It’s so ingrained that even alternative medicine often follows the pack, as in the advice to lower salt intake.And now, we have governments enforcing these false claims. Salt reduction is being enforced in the food industry. Schools are reducing salt in lunches—and some schools are forcing children to eat their lunches instead of bringing them from home. There is now an industry in place to push people into consuming less salt. Don’t expect the results of this study to have any effect on what modern medicine or their cohorts in crime, governmental agencies, do regarding salt recommendations. Too much is riding on them. Reputations of doctors and high-ranking government officials could be harmed if the truth were acknowledged. The waste of massive amounts of the public’s money in promoting lower salt intake would betray the political health of elected officials. In that world, the actual health of the people carries little weight. As a result, any pseudo-study that promotes the approved doctrine is pointed out as “proving” the official proclamation. Any honest study that demonstrates the truth is quickly ridiculed, condemned, and then quietly swept under the rug. Humans have understood the value of salt since humans have existed. It was traded among the earliest communities on earth—likely back in the times of cave dwelling. We use expressions like “salt of the earth” because of that recognition of its value. Only in modern times, with science corrupted by corrupted medicine and government ,is salt treated as our enemy. by Heidi Stevenson
GM soy- The invisible ingredient ‘poisoning’ children
The home of Petrona Villasboa is surrounded by genetically modified (GM) soy fields. The golden crop looks like a bumper harvest but for her it is a symbol of death. -Petrona Villasboa, with a picture of her son Silvino Talavera, who she claims died of ‘intoxication’ after being sprayed by pesticides. Photo: FRIENDS OF THE EARTH
By Louise Gray, Environment Correspondent 7:00AM BST 02 May 2011
“Soy destroys people’s lives,” she says. “It is a poison. It is no way to live. Soy is deadly to us”. Sitting outside her painted green shack in rural Paraguay, the mother of eight describes the day in January 2003 when her 11-year-old son Silvino Talavera came home from cycling to the shops. “I was washing clothes down by the river and he came to tell me he had been sprayed by one of the mosquitoes (the spraying machines behind a tractor),” she says. “He smelt so bad that he took his clothes off and jumped straight in the water.” The busy mum did not think much more about it. For people living around GM soy fields spraying with chemicals is a common occurrence. But later that day the whole family was ill after eating the food that was carried through the heavily-sprayed fields. Petrona rushed her youngest child to hospital and by the time she was back Silvino was in bed rigid with pain. Now in a blind panic, she begged local farmers to take her to hospital. “He was violently sick, he said mummy, my bones ache, his skin went black,” she says. By the time they arrived in the city Silvino was paralysed, all the doctors could do was administer pain killers, while his mother wiped the foam from his mouth. In a few hours he was dead. To the family it was clear this horrific death was caused by chemical intoxication but in their grief no autopsy was ever carried out. It was only after years of campaigning that Petrona managed to get the case to court. Eventually two local farmers were convicted of causing the death, though it is unclear whether they have ever been sent to prison. Like many court cases in Paraguay there are serious unanswered questions. But Petrona is sure of one thing, that her son’s death was caused by GM soy and we should listen to her because we are eating it. Daily Telegraph investigations have found that every single supermarket in Britain stocks meat and dairy from animals fed GM soy. Leading brands including Cadbury, Unilever and Dairycrest, also use products from livestock fed GM. In fact the new technology is so widespread that it is likely at least one item of food you eat today will have come from an animal fed GM soy, whether it was the milk on your cereal or the bacon in your sandwich. But what effect is our growing reliance on soy having on the countries supplying Britain with this ‘invisible ingredient’? Paraguay, a landlocked country in the heart of South America, is on the front line of the new craze for growing ‘green gold’. In many ways it is the perfect place to grow unsustainable soy. Ruled by despotic dictators for centuries, the country is famous for being a hot bed of drug smugglers, Nazi war criminals and even al-Qaeda. Even now, with a new democratically government in place, corruption is rife and regulations to protect the people are lax to say the least. In the last year the amount of land planted with soy has grown to a record 2.6 million hectares, most of which is GM, leading to claims of deforestation, violent land disputes and the ‘poisoning’ of local communities. Already it is estimated that 90 per cent of the Atlantic Rainforest in Paraguay has been lost to make way for crops, taking with it thousands of unique plants species, hundreds of rare birds and endangered animals like the jaguar. There is evidence that soy production is now moving into the vast ‘Gran Chaco’ in the north of the country, the home of some of the last uncontracted tribes on Earth. The Natural History Museum are currently planning an expedition to the area in the hope of finding hundreds of undiscovered species before it is too late. Its not just animals that suffer, the forests were also home to humans. Groups of Guarani people claim they have been driven from their land by the soy farmers. They can be seen camping in pathetic tarpaulin shacks in the town squares or on the road side. ‘Campesinos’, the small farmers who have traditionally worked the land, also claim they have been displaced. Since the first soy boom of 1990 it is estimated 100,000 farmers in Paraguay have been forced to migrate to urban slums. Like the ‘wild west’, as soy production moves into new areas there have been violent clashes between land owners and peasants occupying the land. Many of the ‘invaders’ are from Brazil or the even more alien Mennonites, a religious sect from Germany. Amnesty International say fights over land has led to several deaths, thousands of arrests and hundreds of injuries. In some areas there are reportedly armed guards protecting the soy fields 24 hours a day. Those peasants who have clung to their land claim, like Petrona, that they are being “poisoned” by the ‘mosquitoes’. Most of the crop in Paraguay is GM and requires spraying with agrochemicals. Just as in the UK, farmers are expected to follow certain regulations when spraying fields such as leaving a space between homes or school playgrounds. ‘Live’ barriers of trees should be planted to protect communities and spraying is not allowed in strong winds or hot conditions. However growing evidence of contamination, poisonings and even deaths suggest the rules are not being followed. Farmers are also reported to be using compounds that are outlawed in Europe such as the 2,4-D or combinations of chemicals that could be dangerous. Dr Stela Benítez, a paediatrician at Asuncion University, carried out a study in 2006 summarised in a respected American paediatrics journal, that found women living within 1km of sprayed fields were twice as likely to have a child with deformities. She is quite certain that there is a risk and the regulations should be applied when spraying close to people’s homes, after all there are rules in Europe, so why not protect people in poorer countries? “I am worried about a lack of control in an industry that does not apply the principle of protection over all our children,” she says. The flouting of the law seems to be the main problem in a tour of Paraguay with Friends of the Earth to meet some of the victims of pesticides spraying. The most recent case happened this January in the rolling hills of Colonia Yeruti, where a few families plant maize amid the growing fields of soy. Isabella Portillo, 26, describes how both her husband Reuben Caceras, 28, and her 2-year-old son Diego became sick after the fields were sprayed with a heavy dose of chemicals. The baby survived but she says her husband died of “intoxication” a few days later. “It is hard without him,” she says. “I feel completely alone.” In Itakyru a whole community was affected when poisons “rained from the sky” and Guarani women and children were rushed to hospital. The chief says Giralda Gauto Vera, 18, and her daughter Giseli, 18 months, were in hospital for four days after the planes came. Later the authorities confirm that aerial spraying should not even be allowed in an area dotted with the dwellings of indigenous people. Dr Angie Duarte, who has treated dozens of patients at the public hospital in Curuguaty for what she believes is “intoxication”, admits that many of the worse affected communities are already suffering from malnutrition, immune deficiency and perhaps even using dangerous chemicals themselves on crops. But isn’t that all the more reason to ensure they are protected? “How much is it costing to get this so wrong?” she asks. “I fear this will become a problem for the future because more people are getting sick and it impacts on health system. It is in everyone’s interests to act.” Soy has certainly been in Paraguay’s economic interest over the last year, driving unprecedented growth of 14.5 per cent, ahead of even China. Sweeping his hand across the shimmering fields, Breno Batista Bianchi is confident that it is soy farmers like him that the country has to thank. Using new machinery and GM, he is reporting record yields while using less pesticides and water Of course there are some problems with ‘super weeds’, that build up resistance to chemicals, and outbreaks of disease, but these can easily be solved. “They will invent new seeds, new chemicals,” he says. Bu
t this blind faith in progress is not shared by everyone. Paraguay might be providing the soil, water and labour but a tiny percentage of the population see the profits. Soy is not even taxed and most of it leaves South America labelled as ‘Brazilian’ as shipments are mixed in together at the sea ports. Oskar Rivas, the Environment Minister in a new socialist government, says the growth of soy must not be at the expense of the people.
“It is false development. Who foots the bill? The countryside, the people and the ecosystems and who keeps the profit? The corporations.” Sr Rivas said it is up to the British consumer to demand change. While he accepts it is too late to stop GM being grown in Paraguay, he insists more non-GM could be grown, just as in Brazil where whole states have insisted on a more sustainable system, or at least a more sustainable crop. You have the right to demand cheap milk and meat but you also have the right to demand milk and meat from environmentally sound sources,” he adds. New initiatives such as the Round Table on Responsible Soy (RTSS), backed by WWF, hope to encourage this sort of production by producing a new label for soy, including GM soy, produced in a sustainable way. Already it has been taken up by major supermarkets in the UK including Waitrose, Asda, M&S and Sainsbury’s although many environmental groups are against a scheme that endorses GM. Sitting in his new office complex, that is currently been dug up to make an organic garden, Sr Rivas sketches out his vision for a country that uses some of the best growing conditions in the world to produce healthy sustainable food. Already Friends of the Earth International are working with local charity Sobrevivencia to teach communities environmental law so they can fight back when communities are sprayed and organic farming techniques so they can make their own food. “At the moment we all lose out,” says the minister. “With a different structural process we could all win.”
Pathogen New to Science Found in Roundup Ready GM Crops?
USDA senior scientist sends “emergency” warning to US Secretary of Agriculture
Tom Vilsack on a new plant pathogen in Roundup Ready GM soybean and corn that may be responsible for high rates of infertility and spontaneous abortions in livestock. Dr. Mae-Wan Ho–An open letter appeared on the Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance founded and run by Judith McGeary to save family farms in the US [1, 2]. The letter, written by Don Huber, professor emeritus at Purdue University, to Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, warns of a pathogen “new to science” discovered by “a team of senior plant and animal scientists”. Huber says it should be treated as an “emergency’’, as it could result in “a collapse of US soy and corn export markets and significant disruption of domestic food and feed supplies.”——The letter appeared to have been written before Vilsack announced his decision to authorize unrestricted commercial planting of GM alfalfa on 1 February, in the hope of convincing the Secretary of Agriculture to impose a moratorium instead on deregulation of Roundup Ready (RR) crops. The new pathogen appears associated with serious pervasive diseases in plants -sudden death syndrome in soybean and Goss’ wilt in corn – but its suspected effects on livestock is alarming. Huber refers to “recent reports of infertility rates in dairy heifers of over 20%, and spontaneous abortions in cattle as high as 45%.”This could be the worst nightmare of genetic engineering that some scientists including me have been warning for years  (see Genetic Engineering Dream or Nightmare, ISIS publication): the unintended creation of new pathogens through assisted horizontal gene transfer and recombination. Huber writes in closing: “I have studied plant pathogens for more than 50 years. We are now seeing an unprecedented trend of increasing plant and animal diseases and disorders. This pathogen may be instrumental to understanding and solving this problem. It deserves immediate attention with significant resources to avoid a general collapse of our critical agricultural infrastructure.” The complete letter is reproduced below.
Dear Secretary Vilsack:
A team of senior plant and animal scientists have recently brought to my
attention the discovery of an electron microscopic pathogen that appears to
significantly impact the health of plants, animals, and probably[U1] human beings.
Based on a review of the data, it is widespread, very serious, and is in much
higher concentrations in Roundup Ready (RR) soybeans and corn-suggesting a link with the RR gene or more likely the presence of Roundup. This organism appears NEW to science! This is highly sensitive information that could result in a collapse of US soy and corn export markets and significant disruption of domestic food and feed supplies. On the ther hand, this new organism may already be responsible for significant harm (see below). My colleagues and I are therefore moving our investigation forward with speed and discretion, and seek assistance from the USDA and other entities to identify the pathogen’s source, prevalence, implications, and remedies. We are informing the USDA of our findings at this early stage, specifically due to your pending decision regarding approval of RR alfalfa. Naturally, if either the RR gene or Roundup itself is a promoter or co-factor of this pathogen, then such approval could be a calamity. Based on the current evidence, the only reasonable action at this time would be to delay deregulation at least until sufficient data has exonerated the RR system, if it does. For the past 40 years, I have been a scientist in the professional and military agencies that evaluate and prepare for natural and manmade biological threats, including germ warfare and disease outbreaks. Based on this experience, I believe the threat we are facing from this pathogen is unique and of a high risk status. In layman’s terms, it should be treated as an emergency. A diverse set of researchers working on this problem have contributed various pieces of the puzzle, which together presents the following disturbing scenario: Unique Physical Properties This previously unknown organism is only visible under an electron microscope (36,000X), with an approximate size range equal to a medium size virus. It is able to reproduce and appears to be a micro-fungal-like organism. If so, it would be the first such micro-fungus ever identified. There is strong evidence that this infectious agent promotes diseases of both plants and mammals, which is very rare. Pathogen Location and Concentration It is found in high concentrations in Roundup Ready soybean meal and corn, distillers meal, fermentation feed products, pig stomach contents, and pig and cattle placentas. Linked with Outbreaks of Plant Disease The organism is prolific in plants infected with two pervasive diseases that are driving down yields and farmer income-sudden death syndrome (SDS) in soy, and Goss’ wilt in corn. The pathogen is also found in the fungal causative agent of SDS (Fusarium solani fsp
glycines). Implicated in Animal Reproductive Failure Laboratory tests have confirmed the presence of this organism in a wide variety of livestock that have experienced spontaneous abortions and infertility. Preliminary results from ongoing research have also been able to reproduce abortions in a clinical setting. The pathogen may explain the escalating frequency of infertility and spontaneous abortions over the past few years in US cattle, dairy, swine, and horse operations. These include recent reports of infertility rates in dairy heifers of over 20%, and spontaneous abortions in cattle as high as 45%. For example, 450 of 1,000 pregnant heifers fed wheatlege experienced spontaneous abortions. Over the same period, another 1,000 heifers from the same herd that were raised on hay had no abortions. High concentrations of the pathogen were confirmed management using glyphosate. Recommendations In summary, because of the high titer of this new animal pathogen in Roundup Ready crops, and its association with plant and animal diseases that are reaching epidemic proportions, we request USDA’s participation in a multi-agency investigation, and an immediate moratorium on the deregulation of RR crops until the causal/predisposing relationship with glyphosate and/or RR plants can be ruled out as a threat to crop and animal production and human health.-It is urgent to examine whether the side-effects of glyphosate use may have facilitated the growth of this pathogen, or allowed it to cause greater harm to weakened plant and animal hosts. It is well-documented that glyphosate promotes soil pathogens and is already implicated with the increase of more than 40 plant diseases; it dismantles plant defenses by chelating vital nutrients; and it reduces the bioavailability of nutrients in feed, which in turn can cause animal disorders. [U2]To properly evaluate these factors, we request access to the relevant USDA data.
I have studied plant pathogens for more than 50 years. We are now seeing an
unprecedented trend of increasing plant and animal diseases and disorders. This
pathogen may be instrumental to understanding and solving this problem. It
deserves immediate attention with significant resources to avoid a general
collapse of our critical agricultural infrastructure.
COL (Ret.) Don M. Huber Emeritus Professor, Purdue University APS Coordinator, USDA National Plant Disease Recovery System (NPDRS)
1. “Researcher: Glyphosate (Roundup) or Roundup Ready Crops May Cause
Animal Miscarriages”, Jill Richardson, La Vida Locavore, 18 February 2011
2. “Researcher: Glyphosate (Roundup) or Roundup Ready Crops May Cause Animal
Miscarriages”, 18 February 2011, http://farmandranchfreedom.org/gmo-miscarriages
3. Ho MW. Genetic Engineering Dream of Nightmare? The Brave New World of Bad
Science and Big Business, Third World Network, Gateway Books, MacMillan,
Continuum, Penang, Malaysia, Bath, UK, Dublin, Ireland, New York, USA, 1998,
1999, 2007 (reprint with extended Introduction). http://www.i-
Toxin from GM crops found in human blood
Dinesh C. Sharma | New Delhi, May 11, 2011 | 09:30
Bt toxin is widely used in genetically modified crops.–Fresh doubts have arisen about the safety of genetically modified crops, with a new study reporting presence of Bt toxin, used widely in GM crops, in human blood for the first time.-Genetically modified crops include genes extracted from bacteria to make them resistant to pest attacks.-These genes make crops toxic to pests but are claimed to pose no danger to the environment and human health. Genetically modified brinjal, whose commercial release was stopped a year ago, has a toxin derived from a soil bacterium called Bacillus thuringiensis ( Bt). Till now, scientists and multinational corporations promoting GM crops have maintained that Bt toxin poses no danger to human health as the protein breaks down in the human gut. But the presence of this toxin in human blood shows that this does not happen.–Scientists from the University of Sherbrooke, Canada, have detected the insecticidal protein, Cry1Ab, circulating in the blood of pregnant as well as non-pregnant women.-They have also detected the toxin in fetal blood, implying it could pass on to the next generation. The research paper has been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication in the journal Reproductive Toxicology. The study covered 30 pregnant women and 39 women who had come for tubectomy at the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke (CHUS) in Quebec.–None of them had worked or lived with a spouse working in contact with pesticides.–They were all consuming typical Canadian diet that included GM foods such as soybeans, corn and potatoes. Blood samples were taken before delivery for pregnant women and at tubal ligation for non-pregnant women. Umbilical cord blood sampling was done after birth.-Cry1Ab toxin was detected in 93 per cent and 80 per cent of maternal and fetal blood samples, respectively and in 69 per cent of tested blood samples from non-pregnant women. Earlier studies had found trace amounts of the Cry1Ab toxin in gastrointestinal contents of livestock fed on GM corn. This gave rise to fears that the toxins may not be effectively eliminated in humans and there may be a high risk of exposure through consumption of contaminated meat.-“Generated data will help regulatory agencies responsible for the protection of human health to make better decisions”, noted researchers Aziz Aris and Samuel Leblanc.–Given the potential toxicity of these environmental pollutants and the fragility of the foetus, more studies are needed, particularly those using the placental transfer approach, they added Experts have warned of serious implications for India. Cottonseed oil is made from seeds of genetically modified cotton and thus Bt toxin may have already entered the food chain in India.–“Indian regulators should be immediately called for detailed toxicological studies to know the extent of contamination of the human blood with Bt toxins coming from cottonseed oil, and also ascertain its long term health impacts,” Sharma said.
Meat grown in TEST TUBES instead of on the farm is ‘only a few years away’ as scientists cook up ‘in vitro’ burgers
By Brian Clark Howard
Although the thought of a juicy steak or chicken tender raised in a laboratory, disassociated from fur or feathers, may sound unappetizing, scientists say it’s only a matter of years before we’ll all be tucking in to ‘in vitro meat’.-To one researcher in the growing field, Dr. Vladimir Mironov of the Medical University of South Carolina, it’s not a question of how long it will take before seeing the products on store shelves, it’s a question of how much it will cost to develop. Dr Mironov told ABC: ‘If I had 10 million dollars, then maybe 5 or 10 years’. –Appetizing?: The Tissue Culture and Art Project by Oron Catts, Ionat Zurr and Guy Ben Ary in 2003 invited guests to eat meat grown in the lab from frog cells–Growing meat: Nicholas Genovese of the Medical University of South Carolina works on a new batch of ‘in vitro meat’, which he hopes will be safer than natural meat for consumers
It’s a surprisingly frank revelation from a scientist about something that seems ripped straight out of science fiction.-In fact, Canadian author Margaret Atwood’s acclaimed dystopic novel ‘Oryx and Crake’ described just such a food stuff. In the 2003 book, characters of the future munch on pinkish ‘ChickieNobs’, which are chicken nuggets made in a lab, without actual chickens.-Also that year, The Tissue Culture and Art Project by Oron Catts, Ionat Zurr and Guy Ben Ary invited guests to an art gallery in France to dine on meat grown in the lab from frog cells.-In a trend that perhaps suggests our growing alienation from the methods of our foo d production, urban legends have circulated for several years that this or that fast food chain has already been serving us meat from ‘genetically engineered’ animal parts that lack heads or hearts.-The fact remains that such production methods have remained out of reach, but are getting closer every day. Dr Mironov has been working on the problem for a decade. He says the essential process is taking stem cells from an animal and then immersing them in a plant-derived mixture of nutrients.-Science: Supporters of in vitro meat say it could offer environmental, health and animal welfare benefits As the cells develop, they attach to a natural scaffold, gradually forming muscle tissue, which as butchers know is the primary ingredient in meat. -Scientists envision being able to customize meat blends based on individual taste, fat content or even nutrients. In other words, if you like your beef extra lean, you can have it your way with just the turn of a dial. Want some extra vitamins that are said to boost libido? No problem, juice it up – maybe even with your home-based grower[i3] .-Currently, it costs the equivalent of tens of thousands of dollars to make a patty of ‘in vitro’ meat in the lab[i4] . –But boosters hope economies of scale will mean prices will drop dramatically, if the procedure can be industrialized on a large scale.–One of Dr Mironov’s assistants, Nicholas Genovese, told ABC: ‘There’s many products that we’ve eaten for centuries, such as beer and bread, and these are accepted, traditional products of biotechnology. This is taking it to the next step’. Custom products: Dr. Vladimir Mironov of the Medical University of South Carolina says we may one day be able to order artificial meat to taste, and with extra nutrients-Point taken, although scientists may be underestimating humankind’s strong emotional attachment to our food. -One need only look at the strong opposition to genetically modified foods in much of Europe as evidence, and those products are arguably less foreign than meat grown by a guy in a white lab coat. Still, boosters claim the benefits of in vitro meat will outweigh the initial ick factor – after all, how brave was the person who first tried an oyster? Mr Genovese said:’Conventional meat is a leading cause of food poisoning. Cultured meat produced in aseptic conditions would not have access to those pathogens.’ Outspoken animal rights activists PETA (People For the Ethical Treatment of Animals) have been calling for lab-raised, ‘animal-free’ meat for years, and have been bankrolling some of the research[i5] . They argue that our current system of animal agriculture is extremely destructive to the planet and our own health, let along the lives of millions of animals raised for slaughter every year. Future food: Scientists say they need more money to research artificial meat, which they think may be ready in as few as 5 to 10 years PETA points to studies estimating production of meat accounts for about 20 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions, since ‘factory farming’ is so energy intensive (there’s also the challenge of safely disposing of mountains of smelly waste[i6] ). Researchers of in vitro meat have therefore found unusual allies in some animal and environmental activists, many of whom otherwise push for a return to ‘more natural’ means of food production, such as organics, ‘Slow Food’, and local eating. For[i7] now, the coalition appears fragile, and it’s unclear if fears will be raised about the novelty of the products down the line, or some untested risk, should they get approved by regulatory agencies and commercialized.–Dr Mironov says researchers need more money to advance the science before more is known.
[U1]Don’t you love the Honesty here–we are more worries about animals and not to concerned about human beings “probably human beings ” leaves less credibility to this article and should have emphasized strongly that human beings are being impacted due to the fact we have been eating these things for so long that the diseases can be tied to the food chain—if there is a fertility issue going on with animals then there will be reproductive damge as well to anyone consuming these foods–I.E . Soy causes the reproductive system to become cancerous–genetically modified corn and it’s by product HFCS or corn sugar iniiates and exacerbrates Diabetes and Obesity due to it’s detrimental effect on metabolism-thyroid and pancreas–Amazing compromise here when we are seeing an alarming discovery on livestock being damaged!!!
[U2]This is incredible–the implication here is that due to the nutritional defect in the crops those who choose to be non animal consumers will further exasperate deficiencies that they may have or become deficient over time—these are foods would no value–mass produced and eventually will cause anyone with a weakened to break down completely and anyone with a healthy system to become broken
[i3]Here is the problem adding things to this from a genetic scale there is always usually something amiss here and with the process there is usually issues of material and what you would feed this MEAT=What Chemical additives to cut a corner—what junk or garbage you would initiate this with to save from having to pay for the removal—just like they have done with soy and fish oils and canola to name a few—the way things are heading this will be the choice of farming—totally under the control of the Agribusiness—this will leave the land for further exploitation removing even more trees making the lanet more sterile
[i4]So this then would only feed those who are extremely wealthy—the rest would eat what???
[i5]You have to wonder who these people are—Have you heard of them? This is how these things sell with some obscure group they pull ut of the air to justify a technology they are trying to sell
[i6]Green house gasses are not necessarily a bad thing—this is done in Nature normally when forest and fields yield high amounts of vegetation—it is the Industry meddling with the balance that is the problem not a sector of farming
[i7]This again is WHO
Show of the Week June 6 2011
Cancers’ Sweet Tooth May Be Weakness
Understanding Cancer Energetics: Researchers Solve Mystery of Warburg Effect
Tumors Use Sugars To Avoid Programmed Cell Death
Many Cancer Survivors Can’t Shake Pain, Fatigue, Insomnia, Foggy Brain
Biology of Pain and some Remedial Elements
Substances that alleviate Pain are known as Analgesics.
Cancers’ Sweet Tooth May Be Weakness
ScienceDaily (Nov. 18, 2009) — The pedal-to-the-metal signals driving the growth of several types of cancer cells lead to a common switch governing the use of glucose, researchers at Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University have discovered.-Scientists who study cancer have known for decades that cancer cells tend to consume more glucose, or blood sugar, than healthy cells. This tendency is known as the “Warburg effect,” honoring discoverer Otto Warburg, a German biochemist who won the 1931 Nobel Prize in Medicine. Now a Winship-led team has identified a way to possibly exploit cancer cells’ taste for glucose.-The results were published recently in the journal Science Signaling.-Normally cells have two modes of burning glucose, comparable to sprinting and long-distance running: glycolysis, which doesn’t require oxygen and doesn’t consume all of the glucose molecule, and oxidative phosphorylation, which requires oxygen and is more thorough.—Cancer cells often outgrow their blood supply, leading to a lack of oxygen in a tumor, says Jing Chen, PhD, assistant professor of hematology and medical oncology at Emory University School of Medicine and Winship Cancer Institute. They also benefit from glycolysis because leftovers from the inefficient consumption of glucose can be used as building blocks for growing cells.–“Even if they have oxygen, cancer cells still prefer glycolysis,” Chen says. “They depend on it to grow quickly.”–Working with Chen, postdoctoral researcher Taro Hitosugi focused on the enzyme PKM2 (pyruvate kinase M2), which governs the use of glucose and controls whether cells make the switch between glycolysis and oxidative phosphorylation. PKM2 is found predominantly in fetal cells and in tumor cells.—In many types of cancer, mutations lead to over-activation of proteins called tyrosine kinases. Chen’s team showed that tyrosine kinases turn off PKM2 in lung, breast, prostate and blood cancers. Introducing a form of PKM2 that is not sensitive to tyrosine kinases into cancer cells forces them to grow slower and be more dependent on oxygen, they found.–Because the active form of PKM2 consists of four protein molecules stuck together, having a tyrosine kinase flip the “off” switch on one molecule can dampen the activity for the others.—“People knew that tyrosine kinases might modify PKM2 for decades but they didn’t think it mattered,” Chen says. “We showed that such a modification is important and you even don’t need that much modification of PKM2 to make a difference in the cells’ metabolism.”–PKM2 could be a good drug target, because both inhibiting it or activating it can slow down cancer cell growth. Biotechnology companies are already searching for ways to do so, Chen says.–Scientists from Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Yale University, Cell Signaling Technology Inc. and Novartis contributed to the paper.–The research was supported by the National Institutes of Health, the American Cancer Society and the Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation.
The above story is reprinted (with editorial adaptations by ScienceDaily staff) from materials provided by Emory University.—Journal Reference-Hitosugi et al. Tyrosine Phosphorylation Inhibits PKM2 to Promote the Warburg Effect and Tumor Growth. Science Signaling, 2009; 2 (97): ra73 DOI: 10.1126/scisignal.2000431
Understanding Cancer Energetics: Researchers Solve Mystery of Warburg Effect
ScienceDaily (June 3, 2011) — It’s long been known that cancer cells eat a lot of sugar to stay alive. In fact, where normal, noncancerous cells generate energy from using some sugar and a lot of oxygen, cancerous cells use virtually no oxygen and a lot of sugar. Many genes have been implicated in this process, and now, reporting in the May 27 issue of Cell, researchers at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine have discovered that this so-called Warburg effect is controlled.—“It turns out to be a feed-forward mechanism, where protein A turns on B, which in turn goes back and helps A do more,” says Gregg Semenza, M.D., Ph.D., the C. Michael Armstrong Professor of Medicine, director of the vascular program at Johns Hopkins’ Institute for Cell Engineering and a member of the McKusick-Nathans Institute of Genetic Medicine. “PKM2 normally functions as an enzyme involved in the metabolism of glucose, but in this case we have demonstrated a novel role in the control of gene expression in cancer cells.”–Nearly 20 years ago, Semenza’s research team discovered that HIF-1 can turn on a number of genes that that help cells survive when oxygen levels fall too low. In addition to genes that contribute to building new blood vessels, HIF-1 also turns on genes involved in the metabolic process that turns glucose into energy. One of those genes, pyruvate kinase M2 or PKM2, catalyzes the first step of this metabolic process and is present only in cancer cells.—To figure out whether and if HIF-1 and PKM2 interact, the team first engineered cells to have or lack HIF-1. They kept them in high or low oxygen for 24 hours and found that cells starved of oxygen, but containing HIF-1, had more PKM2 than cells without HIF-1, suggesting that HIF-1 controls the production of PKM2.—The team then asked if HIF-1 and PKM2 physically interact with each other by isolating one of the two proteins from cells; they found that pulling one out also resulted in the other coming along for the ride, showing that the two proteins do in fact bind to each other.–[U1]Knowing that the primary function of HIF-1 is to bind DNA and turn on specific genes, Semenza’s team next asked whether PKM2 somehow helped HIF-1 do that. They examined genes known to be activated by HIF-1 in low oxygen after the removal of PKM2 and found that without PKM2, less HIF-1 was bound to DNA.–Now armed with evidence that PKM2 helps HIF-1 turn on genes, the team looked at the activity of genes directly involved in the metabolic pathway that burns so much sugar in cancer cells and compared genes known to be activated by HIF-1 with those not affected by HIF-1. Removing PKM2 from cells had no effect on genes not controlled by HIF-1 but reduced the activity of HIF-1-controlled genes.
“These results were really astounding,” says Semenza. “In addition to solving the long-standing mystery of the Warburg effect, we also discovered that PKM2 may play a far broader role in promoting cancer progression than has been appreciated before.” This study was funded by the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute.—Authors on the paper are Weibo Luo, Hongxia Hu, Ryan Chang, Jun Zhong, Matthew Knabel, Robert O’Meally, Robert Cole, Akhilesh Pandey and Gregg Semenza, all of Johns Hopkins.–Story Source-The above story is reprinted (with editorial adaptations by ScienceDaily staff) from materials provided by Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions.—Journal Reference-Weibo Luo, Hongxia Hu, Ryan Chang, Jun Zhong, Matthew Knabel, Robert O’Meally, Robert N. Cole, Akhilesh Pandey, Gregg L. Semenza. Pyruvate Kinase M2 Is a PHD3-Stimulated Coactivator for Hypoxia-Inducible Factor 1. Cell, 2011; 145 (5): 732-744 DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2011.03.054
Tumors Use Sugars To Avoid Programmed Cell Death
ScienceDaily (Apr. 17, 2008) — Researchers at the Duke School of Medicine apparently have solved the riddle of why cancer cells like sugar so much, and it may be a mechanism that could lead to better cancer treatments.—Jonathan Coloff, a graduate student in Assistant Professor Jeffrey Rathmell’s laboratory in the Duke Department of Pharmacology and Cancer Biology, has found that the tumor cells use glucose sugar as a way to avoid programmed cell death. They make use of a protein called Akt, which promotes glucose metabolism, which in turn regulates a family of proteins critical for cell survival, the researchers shared during an April 15 presentation at the American Association of Cancer Research Annual Meeting in San Diego.—In normal cells, growth factors regulate metabolism and cell survival. Removing these factors leads to loss of glucose uptake and metabolism and cell death. Cancer cells, however, maintain glucose metabolism and resist cell death, even when deprived of growth factors.–To study how Akt might affect these processes, Coloff and colleagues introduced a cancer-causing form of Akt called myrAkt, into cells that depend on growth factor to survive. The mutant form of Akt allowed cells to maintain glucose usage and survive even when no growth factors were present, allowing them to bypass a normal safeguard used by cells to prevent cancer development.—The death of normal cells after growth factors are removed is partly accomplished by two proteins called Mcl-1 and Puma. But the cancer-causing version of Akt prevents these two proteins from accomplishing their tasks, allowing the cell to survive when it shouldn’t.—Once glucose was withdrawn from the environment, however, Akt was no longer able to maintain regulation of the key targeted proteins Mcl-1 and Puma, and the cells died.[U2]
“Akt’s dependence on glucose to provide an anti-cell-death signal could be a sign of metabolic addiction to glucose in cancer cells, and could give us a new avenue for a metabolic treatment of cancer,” said Dr. Rathmell.
Story Source-The above story is reprinted (with editorial adaptations by ScienceDaily staff) from materials provided by Duke University Medical Center –
Many Cancer Survivors Can’t Shake Pain, Fatigue, Insomnia, Foggy Brain
ScienceDaily (June 4, 2011) — When people finish treatment for cancer, they want to bounce back to their former vital selves as quickly as possible. But a new Northwestern Medicine study — one of the largest survivor studies ever conducted — shows many survivors still suffer moderate to severe problems with pain, fatigue, sleep, memory and concentration three to five years after treatment has ended.–“We were surprised to see how prevalent these symptoms still are,” said study co-investigator Lynne Wagner, an associate professor of medical social sciences at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine and a clinical health psychologist at the Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University. “This is one of the first looks at what’s really happening for survivors in terms of symptoms and treatment among community-based treatment settings across the U.S.”–The persistent pain in survivors who are cancer-free and no longer receiving any treatment is particularly \ haven’t come a long way in managing pain despite a lot of medical advances, ” she said. “This is eye opening. It tells us we need to be better in clinical practice about managing our survivors’ pain.”–Wagner is presenting the findings at the 2011 American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting in Chicago. June 5 is National Cancer Survivors Day.–Cancer survivors seem to slip through the cracks in healthcare in terms of getting treatment for their pain and other symptoms.—“We don’t have a great system to provide care to cancer survivors,” Wagner said. “Cancer survivors are left trying to put the pieces together to find optimal care. They ideally need to see someone who is knowledgeable about the long-term affects of treatment.” She pointed to the example of the STAR (Survivors Taking Action & Responsibility) Survivorship Program at Lurie Cancer Center, a comprehensive long-term follow-up program for survivors of pediatric cancer.–The study included a sample of 248 survivors of breast, colorectal, lung and prostate cancer. The survivors were primarily female and white, and most were more than five years post-diagnosis. They also had been treated in community settings — where 80 percent of people with cancer are treated in the United States — as opposed to academic medical centers. This group best represents the typical experience of cancer survivors around the country, Wagner said.
The most common symptoms reported by survivors were fatigue (16 percent), disturbed sleep (15 percent), cognitive difficulties (13 percent) and pain (13 percent.)—Survivors need education programs for transitioning from treatment to life as a cancer survivor, and this education should include skills for managing these difficult and chronic symptoms[U3], Wagner said. Medical providers also need to be educated about survivors’ lingering symptoms.–“It is acceptable for someone actively going through cancer treatment to have pain medications, but when they transition to being survivors, that acceptance goes away,” Wagner said. “If they ask for pain medication again, doctors may worry that they are getting addicted.” The study also pointed out the need to develop better ways to address sleep problems, fatigue and lasting difficulties with memory and concentration. Non-drug interventions for improving sleep are effective, Wagner said, and researchers need to tailor these for cancer survivors.–Exercise is the most effective weapon against cancer-related fatigue, but it’s challenging to adhere to an exercise regime when you don’t feel well. “We need to see how we can be more effective in promoting physical activity among survivors[U4],” Wagner said.—Researchers also documented any treatment interventions for study participants’ symptoms and then repeated an assessment of the symptoms four weeks later.–“We generally found the same severity of these symptoms one month later, suggesting they tend to be chronic,” Wagner said.–The study stemmed from a 2002 National Cancer Institute meeting on pain, fatigue and depression in cancer. Participants concluded more research was needed on the prevalence of these symptoms.–The study was funded by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, which is funded primarily by the National Institute of Cancer.–Story Source–The above story is reprinted (with editorial adaptations by ScienceDaily staff) from materials provided by Northwestern University, via EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.
Biology of Pain and some Remedial Elements
1.-Nociceptors (a group of Sensory Receptors located throughout the body) convert mechanical, thermal or chemical stimulations that injure or threaten the body’s tissues into Nerve Impulses that generate the sensation of Pain and transmit these Nerve Impulses via the Peripheral Nervous System to Presynaptic Terminals on the Dorsal Horn of the Spinal Cord.
2.-In the Dorsal Horn of the Spinal Cord, Substance P (a Neuropeptide) is released and activates Neurons that transmit further Nerve Impulses relating to Pain to the Brain (specifically the Brain Stem and the Thalamus) via the Spinothalamic Tract and the Spinoreticular Tract. research
3.-Norepinephrine is released from the Locus Coerulus of the Medulla and travels via descending inhibitory pathways to the Dorsal Horn where it reduces the release of Substance P (thereby inhibiting the sensation of Pain).
4.-Serotonin is released from the Raphe Nucleus of the Medulla and travels via descending inhibitory pathways to the Dorsal Horn where it reduces the release of Substance P (thereby inhibiting the sensation of Pain).
5.-Serotonin also reduces the sensation of Pain by stimulating the release of Opioids from the Medulla and the Dorsal Horn of the Spinal Cord (Opioids reduce the release of Substance P).
These Substances Alleviate Pain
Substances that alleviate Pain are known as Analgesics.
Capsaicin (administered orally or applied topically via a cream) alleviates Pain.
Glutamine reduces the sensation of Pain.
Glycine alleviates Pain (by stimulating the production of Endorphins)-However, Glycine cannot pass through the Blood-Brain barrier, so this effect may be difficult to achieve with supplemental Glycine.
Leucine alleviates Pain (by stimulating the production of Endorphins).
Methionine alleviates Pain (by stimulating the production of Endorphins). research
The “D” or “DL” forms of Phenylalanine alleviate chronic Pain (by blocking the Enkephalinase enzyme that breaks down the Opioids involved in the suppression of Pain)-This effect only occurs in some people – inexplicably Phenylalanine has no effect on some people’s perception of Pain.
Tryptophan (2,000 – 4,000 mg per day) increases the body’s Pain threshold (the underlying mechanism for this aspect of Tryptophan may be that Tryptophan is required for the release of Beta-Endorphin, one of the body’s natural Pain relieving compounds).
Tyrosine alleviates Pain (by stimulating the production of Endorphins).
Bromelain reduces the Pain associated with Wounds or Surgery (by minimizing the Inflammation and Edema associated with Wounds).
Papain alleviates the Pain associated with the Inflammation caused by sports injuries or Surgery (in approximately 87% of patients).
Serrapeptase alleviates the Pain associated with Edema, Inflammation and Surgery.
Dimethylvinylcarbinol (a constituent of Hops) alleviates Pain.
Eugenol alleviates Pain. ( clove-all spice-cinnamon-have these compnenets in them
These Foods/Herbs Help to Alleviate Pain
Lime (juice applied topically to Teeth/Gums) alleviates the Pain associated with Toothache.
American Ginseng alleviates Pain.
Black Cohosh reputedly alleviates Pain (due to the Salicylates content of Black Cohosh).
Blue Vervain alleviates Pain.
Burdock (root) reputedly alleviates Pain (according to folklore). Combine this with Vitamin E as well ( non soy based ) to further the potency and increase the anti cancer properties of each other
Chamomile reduces the sensation of Pain.
Chaparral alleviates Pain (due to the Nordihydroguaiaretic Acid (NDGA) content of Chaparral).
Chillis alleviate Pain (due to their Capsaicin component). research
Cloves alleviate Pain (due to Eugenol).
Ginger alleviates Pain.
Hops alleviate Pain (due to the Dimethylvinylcarbinol content of Hops).
Kava Kava helps to reduce Pain. research
Korean Ginseng alleviates Pain.
Noni alleviates Pain (it functions as an analgesic).
Willowbark alleviates Pain (due to Salicin which is chemically similar to Acetylsalicylic Acid [i.e. Aspirin]).
Zizyphus alleviates Pain.
Reishi Mushrooms help to diminish the sensation of Pain (due to Ganoderic Acids).
Birch Polypore Mushrooms as well are very effective in pain killing properties
Melatonin may increase tolerance to Pain.
Excessive sensitivity to Pain can occur as a result of Copper deficiency (Copper is essential for the production of Enkephalins which help to reduce the body’s perception of Pain). research
Germanium very effectively alleviates Pain.
Endorphins alleviate Pain by binding to (mu) Opioid Receptors located on Neurons within the Brain and Spinal Cord: -Beta-Endorphin inhibits the sensation of Pain. -Enkephalins alleviate Pain by binding to (delta) Opioid Receptors located on Neurons within the Brain and Spinal Cord).
Whey Protein helps to alleviate Pain (the Tetrapeptides content of Whey Protein has Opioid-like activity).
Nordihydroguaiaretic Acid (NDGA) alleviates Pain. Chapparal
Alcohol (Ethanol) temporarily dulls the sense of Pain-Caution: Alcohol has many toxic side effects. Special Note —they can be neutralized with NAC/Vitamin C /B1
Marijuana alleviates Pain (by binding to Pain Receptors in the Brain)-Caution: Marijuana usage is generally illegal and Marijuana usage has toxic side effects. ( Only if the toxics a re planted with the crop )
Dimethyl Sulfoxide (DMSO) alleviates Pain by inhibiting the conduction of Nerve Impulses associated with Pain in the smaller Nerve Fibers. research
Methylsulfonylmethane (MSM) alleviates Pain (it is speculated that MSM may inhibit the transmission of Nerve Impulses associated with Pain). research
Folic Acid alleviates Pain.
Inositol alleviates Pain
Vitamin B1 (1,000 – 4,000 mg per day) alleviates Pain.
Dosages of supplemental Vitamin B6 in excess of 2,000 mg per day impairs the sense of Pain-Caution: this extremely high dosage level of Vitamin B6 should not be practiced due to various toxic side effects associated with such a large dosage.
Vitamin C alleviates Pain (by facilitating the production of painkilling Neurotransmitters and by inhibiting the production of Prostaglandin E2).
Lettuce slightly alleviates Pain.
Radish (juice) alleviates the Pain associated with Burns and Insect Bites/Stings.
Other Treatments for Pain
Acupuncture reduces Pain (by stimulating the release of Endorphins).
Rye Sprouts (concentrated extracts of Rye Sprouts such as Oralmat) alleviate Pain (by inhibiting the endogenous production of Substance P).
[U1]Crucial Observation—this means without one you cannot have the other—a gun and a bullet have either one and not the other makes the device uneventful—but put them together and you have a deadly combo—in this case the genes are triggering a response to increase sugar usage to feed a cell–Cancer
[U2]HUGE finding here– the removal of glucose and the cells follow there normal cycle of death and life—Anyone want to reduce HFCS or now known as corn sugar–or how about maltodextrin or even Sugar or dextrose—the issue as well is what theses “sugars” or sweetners are bound to as well that may cause a triggering effect–by staying in the system longer and allowing this food to be available for cancer or other pathogens that need sugar
[U3]Managing Symptoms???? there should not be any–the reason the pain is there is the result of the side effects and build up of these waste chemcials from the treatments—there is no protocol in the medical field to chelate these chemicals out –reducing the toxic overload–the amazing thing here is that they are calling this or trying to create another health issue to present more PAIN KILLING DRUGS
[U4]This is totally absurd—the fact some one is in pain will increase activity is not going to happen if anything the inverse would be the case—any increase in lactic acid production will further the pain in the body—No one will go through any regimen if they are in that much pain !!!!