I believe many people that come here to these forums are not
looking for scientific argument, but for possible treatments for
themselves or loved ones. While I cannot guarantee Artemisinin as a
treatment,

PM wrote:
IIRC their work was entirely in the test tube, and under very
artificial conditions at that (heavy iron loading of the cells that is
probably impractical in vivo). I am also unaware of any evidence that
Artemisin has yet shown any clinical effectiveness, i.e. effects on
cancer in humans, although I understand it is under study in some
places. Do you have any better evidence to present?

Using such a product might also disqualify the enquirer from clinical
trials of other agents.

Since we know the foundation is using the compound, we know it
is safe for humans. There have been over 350 papers written on it by
many scientists and doctors.

Mostly, I am sure, because it is in wide use as an antimalarial.

Since it can't be patented, the big drug
companies have no interest in it, as it won't make them money.

This has not prevented wide usage by doctors as a second-line
antimalarial. And, as said, I believe, studies of its use in cancer
are under way.

Peter Moran
www.cancerwatcher.com

Peter,
Anything you or I print here could easily be a complete load of
baloney, including 'facts' and 'evidence' of all sorts. I would rather
have people look up the information on their own and decide. My
intention here is not to get into some kind of argument with you about
Artemisinin but to present another possible treatment for a disease
that so far has mainly enriched those that cluster around it selling
products and making careers, and caused much pain and death where it
may not be necessary. By researching Artemisinin a little further than
you seem to have, you may find that there have indeed been in vivo
studies and much anecdotal evidence reported by doctors, especially in
the orient (China and India) that offer hope for a number of people.

This compound is being
used by the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation against malaria, but the
2 doctors at the University of Washington that have been studying it
for 10 years now have found that it works very well on most types of
cancers for similar reasons. They are Drs. Henry Lai and Narendra
Singh.

I believe many people that come here to these forums are not
looking for scientific argument, but for possible treatments for
themselves or loved ones. While I cannot guarantee Artemisinin as a
treatment, I have heard many good things about it, and I can offer it
to those that might gain something from it. If it is ineffective, many
will certainly come here and loudly proclaim it a useless compound to
be avoided.
People aren't fools. They can decide their own situation based on
their own research and whether they have the time and the belief in a
treatment to go ahead and try it. It's nice to be a 'protector' of
folks from quack cures, but don't throw out the baby with the bath
water because you have a little knowledge on a subject. Research this
one a little more deeply.

mainframetech wrote:
PM wrote:
IIRC their work was entirely in the test tube, and under very
artificial conditions at that (heavy iron loading of the cells that is
probably impractical in vivo). I am also unaware of any evidence that
Artemisin has yet shown any clinical effectiveness, i.e. effects on
cancer in humans, although I understand it is under study in some
places. Do you have any better evidence to present?

Using such a product might also disqualify the enquirer from clinical
trials of other agents.

Since we know the foundation is using the compound, we know it
is safe for humans. There have been over 350 papers written on it by
many scientists and doctors.

Mostly, I am sure, because it is in wide use as an antimalarial.

Since it can't be patented, the big drug
companies have no interest in it, as it won't make them money.

This has not prevented wide usage by doctors as a second-line
antimalarial. And, as said, I believe, studies of its use in cancer
are under way.

Peter Moran
www.cancerwatcher.com

Peter,
Anything you or I print here could easily be a complete load of
baloney, including 'facts' and 'evidence' of all sorts. I would rather
have people look up the information on their own and decide. My
intention here is not to get into some kind of argument with you about
Artemisinin but to present another possible treatment for a disease
that so far has mainly enriched those that cluster around it selling
products and making careers, and caused much pain and death where it
may not be necessary. By researching Artemisinin a little further than
you seem to have, you may find that there have indeed been in vivo
studies and much anecdotal evidence reported by doctors, especially in
the orient (China and India) that offer hope for a number of people.

Chris, the only reason I responded was that you said the following ---

This compound is being
used by the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation against malaria, but the
2 doctors at the University of Washington that have been studying it
for 10 years now have found that it works very well on most types of
cancers for similar reasons. They are Drs. Henry Lai and Narendra
Singh.

You should have specified that this was in vitro work. Most lay people
would get quite the wrong impression from this.

I believe many people that come here to these forums are not
looking for scientific argument, but for possible treatments for
themselves or loved ones. While I cannot guarantee Artemisinin as a
treatment, I have heard many good things about it, and I can offer it
to those that might gain something from it. If it is ineffective, many
will certainly come here and loudly proclaim it a useless compound to
be avoided.
People aren't fools. They can decide their own situation based on
their own research and whether they have the time and the belief in a
treatment to go ahead and try it. It's nice to be a 'protector' of
folks from quack cures, but don't throw out the baby with the bath
water because you have a little knowledge on a subject. Research this
one a little more deeply.

This is a bit unfair. I actually checked Medline to see if there were
any recent
publications of clinical results from Artemisinin before I posted my
comments. . I even asked you politely if you had any clinical
evidence. I am trying to keep up to date on this kind of thing all
the time.

It is also insulting to assume that I ever dismiss alternative claims
without looking closely at the evidence. My web site shows the lengths
to which I have been prepared to go in that regard. I am certainly
uncompromising in expecting the highest standard of case reports or
other evidence in support of such important claims as to be able to
cure cancer. I think that puts me firmly on the side of the cancer
patient.

I have also not objected to cancer patients working from lower levels
of evidence if they wish. The rest of us, however, should be working
to make sure that those selling or promoting such treatments are giving
cancer patients accurate information. They rarely ever do, and that
is what I am about.

Peter Moran

www.cancerwatcher.com

PM wrote:
IIRC their work was entirely in the test tube, and under very
artificial conditions at that (heavy iron loading of the cells that is
probably impractical in vivo). I am also unaware of any evidence that
Artemisin has yet shown any clinical effectiveness, i.e. effects on
cancer in humans, although I understand it is under study in some
places. Do you have any better evidence to present?

snipped some

This is a bit unfair. I actually checked Medline to see if there were
any recent
publications of clinical results from Artemisinin before I posted my
comments. . I even asked you politely if you had any clinical
evidence. I am trying to keep up to date on this kind of thing all
the time.

It is also insulting to assume that I ever dismiss alternative claims
without looking closely at the evidence. My web site shows the lengths
to which I have been prepared to go in that regard. I am certainly
uncompromising in expecting the highest standard of case reports or
other evidence in support of such important claims as to be able to
cure cancer. I think that puts me firmly on the side of the cancer
patient.

I have also not objected to cancer patients working from lower levels
of evidence if they wish. The rest of us, however, should be working
to make sure that those selling or promoting such treatments are giving
cancer patients accurate information. They rarely ever do, and that
is what I am about.

Peter Moran

www.cancerwatcher.com

Peter,
As I mentioned before, any of us can put anything here and make it
look believable. I explained that I could suggest I was a doctor (I'm
not) and all sorts of things. If you took insult from my words, please
don't, since it wasn't intended. What was on my mind was someone
expecting 'evidence' from me for a compound when they are not
interested in putting out the 'evidence' against it.

PM wrote:

PM wrote:
IIRC their work was entirely in the test tube, and under very
artificial conditions at that (heavy iron loading of the cells that is
probably impractical in vivo). I am also unaware of any evidence that
Artemisin has yet shown any clinical effectiveness, i.e. effects on
cancer in humans, although I understand it is under study in some
places. Do you have any better evidence to present?

snipped some

This is a bit unfair. I actually checked Medline to see if there were
any recent
publications of clinical results from Artemisinin before I posted my
comments. . I even asked you politely if you had any clinical
evidence. I am trying to keep up to date on this kind of thing all
the time.

There's one case report, 6 years ago here
http://www.onk.ns.ac.yu/archive/Vol10/PDFVol10/V10n4p279.pdf
A seventy-two year old vegetarian male with a long history of tobacco chewing
and smoking was admitted to Vivekanand Hospital (Meerut, India) on December 15,
2000.

stage II cancer of the larynx (T2 N1 M0). A diagnosis of differentiated
squamous cell carcinoma was established after histopathological examination of
a biopsy from the growth. The patient complained of plained of progressive
hoarseness, and loss of appetite and weight for the last eight months. Physical
examination revealed enlarged cervical lymph nodes on the right side of the
neck

Laryngoscopic examination showed a growth on the right side of the larynx.. The
growth was covering the right vocal cord, right pyriform fossa, ventral aspect
of epiglottis, and adjacent area of the lateral pharyngeal wall. The surface of
the growth was irregular, nodular, ulcerated and bled on touch.
Its size was approximately 3 cm x 2.5 cm x 3 cm=22.5 cm

[He'd had intermittent pain and swallowing difficulties for the previous 6
months. - me summarizing]

artesunate treatment was started on 01/22/2001. On day one of treatment, a
capsule containing ferrous sulfate (150 mg) and folic acid (0.5 mg) was given
orally at 2:00 PM after a meal. Injections of artesunate (60 mg I.M. per day;
were given from day one (01/22/2001) to day 15 (02/05/2001) at 10:00 PM of each
day.
The patient had a fever (100-101°F) from day four to day seven of the
treatment.
Within two weeks of the treatment, his voice became clear. The patient was able
to take solid foods quite comfortably. He regained a good appetite. Clinical
examination revealed cervical lymph nodes were reduced in size.
Without treatment, laryngeal cancer patients die within an average of 12 months
(1).
The patient lived for nearly one year and eight months (until his death on
1/11/02 due to pneumonia) after the appearance of symptoms, although treatment
was discontinued after nine months.

In an unrelated note, the patients had extensive patches of leukoderma around
his mouth, on fingers of both hands, which responded well to artesunate
treatment over the nine months of observation.

Since this case, several patients with different types of cancers have begun
treatment with artemisinin and its analogs with promising results.

Narendra P. SINGH
Krishna B. VERMA
Archive of Oncology 2002;10(4):279-80.
The authors are grateful to Miss Himani Singh for her help in preparation of
the manuscript."

No idea what happened to the other patients mentioned.
I think it says the author (Singh) can be contacted.
J

It is also insulting to assume that I ever dismiss alternative claims
without looking closely at the evidence. My web site shows the lengths
to which I have been prepared to go in that regard. I am certainly
uncompromising in expecting the highest standard of case reports or
other evidence in support of such important claims as to be able to
cure cancer. I think that puts me firmly on the side of the cancer
patient.

I have also not objected to cancer patients working from lower levels
of evidence if they wish. The rest of us, however, should be working
to make sure that those selling or promoting such treatments are giving
cancer patients accurate information. They rarely ever do, and that
is what I am about.

Peter Moran

www.cancerwatcher.com

PM wrote:

PM wrote:
IIRC their work was entirely in the test tube, and under very
artificial conditions at that (heavy iron loading of the cells that is
probably impractical in vivo). I am also unaware of any evidence that
Artemisin has yet shown any clinical effectiveness, i.e. effects on
cancer in humans, although I understand it is under study in some
places. Do you have any better evidence to present?

snipped some

This is a bit unfair. I actually checked Medline to see if there were
any recent
publications of clinical results from Artemisinin before I posted my
comments. . I even asked you politely if you had any clinical
evidence. I am trying to keep up to date on this kind of thing all
the time.

There's one case report, 6 years ago here
http://www.onk.ns.ac.yu/archive/Vol10/PDFVol10/V10n4p279.pdf
A seventy-two year old vegetarian male with a long history of tobacco chewing
and smoking was admitted to Vivekanand Hospital (Meerut, India) on December 15,
2000.

stage II cancer of the larynx (T2 N1 M0). A diagnosis of differentiated
squamous cell carcinoma was established after histopathological examination of
a biopsy from the growth. The patient complained of plained of progressive
hoarseness, and loss of appetite and weight for the last eight months. Physical
examination revealed enlarged cervical lymph nodes on the right side of the
neck

Laryngoscopic examination showed a growth on the right side of the larynx.. The
growth was covering the right vocal cord, right pyriform fossa, ventral aspect
of epiglottis, and adjacent area of the lateral pharyngeal wall. The surface of
the growth was irregular, nodular, ulcerated and bled on touch.
Its size was approximately 3 cm x 2.5 cm x 3 cm=22.5 cm

[He'd had intermittent pain and swallowing difficulties for the previous 6
months. - me summarizing]

artesunate treatment was started on 01/22/2001. On day one of treatment, a
capsule containing ferrous sulfate (150 mg) and folic acid (0.5 mg) was given
orally at 2:00 PM after a meal. Injections of artesunate (60 mg I.M. per day;
were given from day one (01/22/2001) to day 15 (02/05/2001) at 10:00 PM of each
day.
The patient had a fever (100-101°F) from day four to day seven of the
treatment.
Within two weeks of the treatment, his voice became clear. The patient was able
to take solid foods quite comfortably. He regained a good appetite. Clinical
examination revealed cervical lymph nodes were reduced in size.
Without treatment, laryngeal cancer patients die within an average of 12 months
(1).
The patient lived for nearly one year and eight months (until his death on
1/11/02 due to pneumonia) after the appearance of symptoms, although treatment
was discontinued after nine months.

In an unrelated note, the patients had extensive patches of leukoderma around
his mouth, on fingers of both hands, which responded well to artesunate
treatment over the nine months of observation.

Since this case, several patients with different types of cancers have begun
treatment with artemisinin and its analogs with promising results.

Narendra P. SINGH
Krishna B. VERMA
Archive of Oncology 2002;10(4):279-80.
The authors are grateful to Miss Himani Singh for her help in preparation of
the manuscript."

No idea what happened to the other patients mentioned.
I think it says the author (Singh) can be contacted.
J

J,
Thank you for the information. Peter may also appreciate it, since
he had asked me for that type of info. He might want the link to it.

Peter,
Please stop taking personal issue with what I say. I promise I'm
not out to insult you, only defend my point of view from your
viewpoint.


Artemisinin is not simply an alternative herb. Not if the Gates
Foundation is applying it to many patients for malaria. Interestingly
enough, if you have a medical background you'll appreciate that the
scientists and doctors that have commented on the Artemisinin studies
say that it kills cancer in the same way it kills the malaria parasite.
It apparently is drawn to the iron-rich cancer (or malaria host) cells
and kills the cells (apoptosis?) when in the presence of an
overabundant amount of iron. It seems to leave the normal cells alone.
You can see where this method would be more able to kill cancer in the
fine interstices of the body that surgery or maybe directed radiation
might miss. Happily, because of the Gates Foundation, we know the
compound is safe for humans, and painless.

Again, I suggest to all seekers here to research 'Artemisinin' and
the 2 doctors that have been studying it; Drs. Henry Lai and Narendra
Singh at the University of Washington. This compound can be taken at
the same time as many other treatments and not get in the way. I think
there is only a problem with radiation therapy where you have to wait a
while. Have a look at the compound and make your decisions.

Fakes, bottlenecks hobble herb's fight vs malaria

By Tan Ee Lyn

HONG KONG (Reuters) - Li Guoqiao was a village doctor in
China's southwestern Yunnan province in 1974 when the
government asked him to try using an herbal drug,
artemisinin, to treat malaria patients.

What followed was one of China's first clinical trials
using the herb, and the results were startling. All 18
patients felt better within hours and recovered a few days later.

"Within 2 hours, their fever came under control. One of
them was a woman who had just suffered a miscarriage and
was unconscious when she was brought in. She recovered,"
said Li, now a professor at the Tropical Medicine Institute
in Guangzhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine in
southern China.

Chinese herbalists used leaves from the Artemisia annua, or
sweet wormwood shrub, to treat mosquito-borne malaria for
more than 1,500 years. But it was not until the late 1960s,
that scientists identified the anti-malarial ingredient in the plant.

Today, artemisinin is widely regarded by medical experts as
the best drug against malaria -- which kills a person every
30 seconds. According to the World Health Organization
(WHO), 90 percent of these deaths occur in sub-Saharan
Africa.

In 2001, the WHO said artemisinin should be used in
combination with other drugs to slow down any development
of resistance.

But artemisinin is in short supply and this fact, plus the
high pries charged for it, have led to the production of
fake drugs, in some cases causing death.

"Fake drugs are all over the place and they are really
creating problems in Asia. We are afraid they might get
into Africa too as demand increases," said Kevin Palmer,
WHO's regional adviser for malaria in the Western Pacific.

Fakes seized in recent years in Vietnam, Cambodia and
Thailand contained no artemisinin.

"They are easy to fake, 97 percent of fakes seized are just
chalk. It's very worrying ... someone is making millions,"
Palmer said, adding that Interpol was investigating the cases.

Professor Li said: "These people are very sick and after
eating these pills, they are ineffective and the victims
become unconscious and die. This is very unethical."

In Thailand, government workers conduct spot tests at least
twice a year in districts where fake anti-malarial drugs are
known to have surfaced. These districts are typically along
the Thai-Cambodia and Thai-Myanmar border.

"We use our equipment, called mini-lab, to check the drugs
in the field to see if they are genuine," said Wichai
Satimai of Thailand's Public Health Ministry.

While there are no official figures of deaths from fake
anti-malarial drugs in Thailand, Wichai said results were grave.

"Fake drugs cause complications and higher mortality. If
the drug is sub-standard -- say it has only 50 percent of
the active ingredient -- it can't kill the whole protozoa
(parasite). It will produce drug resistance," Wichai told Reuters.

FAKES AND BOTTLENECKS

Malaria is one of the world's oldest diseases and infects
between 300 million and 500 million people each year, killing
over a million of them, according to WHO. It is also an
economy killer, with the drain on African output estimated by
WHO at $12 billion yearly.

It is caused by protozoan parasites, which thrive in humans
and are passed person-to-person by female Anopheles
mosquitoes.

There is no vaccine against the parasite, which has grown
resistant to well-known anti-malarial drugs, like chloroquine
and pyrimethamine.

In early December, the World Health Organization launched a
new global effort to find a vaccine by 2015. In the
meantime, artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs)
remain the most effective cure for the disease.

But supplies are tight.

"Supplies of the raw material (artemisinin) from China and
Vietnam are limited. It's a natural product and they aren't
growing enough to supply the world's demand," said Palmer.

Developing countries must buy ACTs from WHO-accredited
suppliers if they want to use funds from the U.N.-backed
Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. So far,
only two suppliers -- Swiss drug maker Novartis AG and Guilin
Pharmaceuticals Company in China's southwestern city of
Guilin -- are WHO-accredited.

Launched in 2002, the Global Fund makes up about two-thirds
of financing to prevent and treat malaria and it is the
main financier of developing countries' scale-up of ACT
drugs.

The Chinese drug maker will soon be switching production
from artemisinin to ACTs. And that has increased fears of fakes.

"The people in Guilin are now worried that they (makers of
fakes) will start copying their artesunate combination
tablet, which they are producing for Africa. They are
really scared," Palmer said.

One way to beat ACT fakes is to get more genuine suppliers
accredited with WHO.

"The main producers of combination therapies are in China
and Vietnam, but most of them don't meet international
standards. They are not available for purchase by the Global
Fund although they can be marketed as they are," said Palmer.

WHO is working with producers to improve their production
facilities and quality control, he said.

"In many cases, these drugs are not getting to the people
who need them, they are using less effective drugs because
that's all they can afford," he said. "It's a real crisis at
the moment."

J,
Thank you for the information. Peter may also appreciate it, since
he had asked me for that type of info. He might want the link to it.

Peter,
Please stop taking personal issue with what I say. I promise I'm
not out to insult you, only defend my point of view from your
viewpoint.

Artemisinin is not simply an alternative herb. Not if the Gates
Foundation is applying it to many patients for malaria.
Malaria is not cancer, so quit trying to squeeze more out of this fact

Interestingly enough, if you have a medical background you'll appreciate
that the scientists and doctors that have commented on the Artemisinin
studies say that it kills cancer in the same way it kills the malaria
parasite. It apparently is drawn to the iron-rich cancer (or malaria host)
cells and kills the cells (apoptosis?) when in the presence of an
overabundant amount of iron. It seems to leave the normal cells alone.
You can see where this method would be more able to kill cancer in the
fine interstices of the body that surgery or maybe directed radiation
might miss. Happily, because of the Gates Foundation, we know the
compound is safe for humans, and painless.
another word from our magnanamous sponsor..

Again, I suggest to all seekers here to research 'Artemisinin' and
the 2 doctors that have been studying it; Drs. Henry Lai and Narendra
Singh at the University of Washington. This compound can be taken at
the same time as many other treatments and not get in the way. I think
there is only a problem with radiation therapy where you have to wait a
while. Have a look at the compound and make your decisions.
in vitro stuff, as Peter mentioned.

Chris
J wrote:
PM wrote:

PM wrote:
IIRC their work was entirely in the test tube, and under very
artificial conditions at that (heavy iron loading of the cells that is
probably impractical in vivo). I am also unaware of any evidence that
Artemisin has yet shown any clinical effectiveness, i.e. effects on
cancer in humans, although I understand it is under study in some
places. Do you have any better evidence to present?

snipped some

This is a bit unfair. I actually checked Medline to see if there were
any recent
publications of clinical results from Artemisinin before I posted my
comments. . I even asked you politely if you had any clinical
evidence. I am trying to keep up to date on this kind of thing all
the time.

There's one case report, 6 years ago here
http://www.onk.ns.ac.yu/archive/Vol10/PDFVol10/V10n4p279.pdf> A
seventy-two year old vegetarian male with a long history of tobacco
chewing and smoking was admitted to Vivekanand Hospital (Meerut, India)
on December 15, 2000.
One case = anecdote..

stage II cancer of the larynx (T2 N1 M0). A diagnosis of differentiated
squamous cell carcinoma was established after histopathological
examination of a biopsy from the growth. The patient complained of
plained of progressive hoarseness, and loss of appetite and weight for
the last eight months. Physical examination revealed enlarged cervical
lymph nodes on the right side of the neck

Laryngoscopic examination showed a growth on the right side of the
larynx. The growth was covering the right vocal cord, right pyriform
fossa, ventral aspect of epiglottis, and adjacent area of the lateral
pharyngeal wall. The surface of the growth was irregular, nodular,
ulcerated and bled on touch. Its size was approximately 3 cm x 2.5 cm x
3 cm=22.5 cm
sounds more advanced than a T2 BTW..

[He'd had intermittent pain and swallowing difficulties for the previous 6
months. - me summarizing]

artesunate treatment was started on 01/22/2001. On day one of treatment,
a capsule containing ferrous sulfate (150 mg) and folic acid (0.5 mg)
was given orally at 2:00 PM after a meal. Injections of artesunate (60
mg I.M. per day; were given from day one (01/22/2001) to day 15
(02/05/2001) at 10:00 PM of each day.
There's the commercial opportunity: sell it in a combination pack!

The patient had a fever (100-101°F) from day four to day seven of the
treatment. Within two weeks of the treatment, his voice became clear.
The patient was able to take solid foods quite comfortably. He regained
a good appetite. Clinical examination revealed cervical lymph nodes were
reduced in size. Without treatment, laryngeal cancer patients die within
an average of 12 months (1). The patient lived for nearly one year and
eight months (until his death on 1/11/02 due to pneumonia) after the
appearance of symptoms, although treatment was discontinued after nine
months.
Hmm.. artemisinin (not sure of artesunate) is cheaper than most

In an unrelated note, the patients had extensive patches of leukoderma
around his mouth, on fingers of both hands, which responded well to
artesunate treatment over the nine months of observation.

Since this case, several patients with different types of cancers have begun
treatment with artemisinin and its analogs with promising results.

Narendra P. SINGH
Krishna B. VERMA
Archive of Oncology 2002;10(4):279-80.
The authors are grateful to Miss Himani Singh for her help in preparation of
the manuscript."

No idea what happened to the other patients mentioned.
I think it says the author (Singh) can be contacted.
J

It is also insulting to assume that I ever dismiss alternative claims
without looking closely at the evidence. My web site shows the lengths
to which I have been prepared to go in that regard. I am certainly
uncompromising in expecting the highest standard of case reports or
other evidence in support of such important claims as to be able to
cure cancer. I think that puts me firmly on the side of the cancer
patient.

I have also not objected to cancer patients working from lower levels
of evidence if they wish. The rest of us, however, should be working
to make sure that those selling or promoting such treatments are giving
cancer patients accurate information. They rarely ever do, and that
is what I am about.

Peter Moran

www.cancerwatcher.com

mainframetechwrote:
J,
Thank you for the information. Peter may also appreciate it, since
he had asked me for that type of info. He might want the link to it.Actually I had previously seen this case. Read my comments to J.







Peter,
Please stop taking personal issue with what I say. I promise I'm
not out to insult you, only defend my point of view from your
viewpoint.

Artemisinin is not simply an alternative herb. Not if the Gates
Foundation is applying it to many patients for malaria. Interestingly
enough, if you have a medical background you'll appreciate that the
scientists and doctors that have commented on the Artemisinin studies
say that it kills cancer in the same way it kills the malaria parasite.
It apparently is drawn to the iron-rich cancer (or malaria host) cells
and kills the cells (apoptosis?) when in the presence of an
overabundant amount of iron. It seems to leave the normal cells alone.
You can see where this method would be more able to kill cancer in the
fine interstices of the body that surgery or maybe directed radiation
might miss. Happily, because of the Gates Foundation, we know the
compound is safe for humans, and painless.

Again, I suggest to all seekers here to research 'Artemisinin' and
the 2 doctors that have been studying it; Drs. Henry Lai and Narendra
Singh at the University of Washington. This compound can be taken at
the same time as many other treatments and not get in the way. I think
there is only a problem with radiation therapy where you have to wait a
while. Have a look at the compound and make your decisions.But understand that these are test tube studies and that just about
anything will kill cancer in the test tube. There is still no
evidence that Artemesinin is effective against cancer in humans, or
superior ot other chemotherapeutic agents when used in optimal dosages,
or even that the effective dose against cancer is known. And it may
interfere with other treatments, if it is effective. It is one of
those things to try when there are no other options of known usefulness
in treatment or palliation..

I have also just received information that there is a lot of fake
Artemesinin about. See the following ---





Fakes, bottlenecks hobble herb's fight vs malaria

By Tan Ee Lyn

HONG KONG (Reuters) - Li Guoqiao was a village doctor in
China's southwestern Yunnan province in 1974 when the
government asked him to try using an herbal drug,
artemisinin, to treat malaria patients.

What followed was one of China's first clinical trials
using the herb, and the results were startling. All 18
patients felt better within hours and recovered a few days later.

"Within 2 hours, their fever came under control. One of
them was a woman who had just suffered a miscarriage and
was unconscious when she was brought in. She recovered,"
said Li, now a professor at the Tropical Medicine Institute
in Guangzhou University of Traditional Chinese Medicine in
southern China.

Chinese herbalists used leaves from the Artemisia annua, or
sweet wormwood shrub, to treat mosquito-borne malaria for
more than 1,500 years. But it was not until the late 1960s,
that scientists identified the anti-malarial ingredient in the plant.

Today, artemisinin is widely regarded by medical experts as
the best drug against malaria -- which kills a person every
30 seconds. According to the World Health Organization
(WHO), 90 percent of these deaths occur in sub-Saharan
Africa.

In 2001, the WHO said artemisinin should be used in
combination with other drugs to slow down any development
of resistance.

But artemisinin is in short supply and this fact, plus the
high pries charged for it, have led to the production of
fake drugs, in some cases causing death.

"Fake drugs are all over the place and they are really
creating problems in Asia. We are afraid they might get
into Africa too as demand increases," said Kevin Palmer,
WHO's regional adviser for malaria in the Western Pacific.

Fakes seized in recent years in Vietnam, Cambodia and
Thailand contained no artemisinin.

"They are easy to fake, 97 percent of fakes seized are just
chalk. It's very worrying ... someone is making millions,"
Palmer said, adding that Interpol was investigating the cases.

Professor Li said: "These people are very sick and after
eating these pills, they are ineffective and the victims
become unconscious and die. This is very unethical."

In Thailand, government workers conduct spot tests at least
twice a year in districts where fake anti-malarial drugs are
known to have surfaced. These districts are typically along
the Thai-Cambodia and Thai-Myanmar border.

"We use our equipment, called mini-lab, to check the drugs
in the field to see if they are genuine," said Wichai
Satimai of Thailand's Public Health Ministry.

While there are no official figures of deaths from fake
anti-malarial drugs in Thailand, Wichai said results were grave.

"Fake drugs cause complications and higher mortality. If
the drug is sub-standard -- say it has only 50 percent of
the active ingredient -- it can't kill the whole protozoa
(parasite). It will produce drug resistance," Wichai told Reuters.

FAKES AND BOTTLENECKS

Malaria is one of the world's oldest diseases and infects
between 300 million and 500 million people each year, killing
over a million of them, according to WHO. It is also an
economy killer, with the drain on African output estimated by
WHO at $12 billion yearly.

It is caused by protozoan parasites, which thrive in humans
and are passed person-to-person by female Anopheles
mosquitoes.

There is no vaccine against the parasite, which has grown
resistant to well-known anti-malarial drugs, like chloroquine
and pyrimethamine.

In early December, the World Health Organization launched a
new global effort to find a vaccine by 2015. In the
meantime, artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs)
remain the most effective cure for the disease.

But supplies are tight.

"Supplies of the raw material (artemisinin) from China and
Vietnam are limited. It's a natural product and they aren't
growing enough to supply the world's demand," said Palmer.

Developing countries must buy ACTs from WHO-accredited
suppliers if they want to use funds from the U.N.-backed
Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. So far,
only two suppliers -- Swiss drug maker Novartis AG and Guilin
Pharmaceuticals Company in China's southwestern city of
Guilin -- are WHO-accredited.

Launched in 2002, the Global Fund makes up about two-thirds
of financing to prevent and treat malaria and it is the
main financier of developing countries' scale-up of ACT
drugs.

The Chinese drug maker will soon be switching production
from artemisinin to ACTs. And that has increased fears of fakes.

"The people in Guilin are now worried that they (makers of
fakes) will start copying their artesunate combination
tablet, which they are producing for Africa. They are
really scared," Palmer said.

One way to beat ACT fakes is to get more genuine suppliers
accredited with WHO.

"The main producers of combination therapies are in China
and Vietnam, but most of them don't meet international
standards. They are not available for purchase by the Global
Fund although they can be marketed as they are," said Palmer.

WHO is working with producers to improve their production
facilities and quality control, he said.

"In many cases, these drugs are not getting to the people
who need them, they are using less effective drugs because
that's all they can afford," he said. "It's a real crisis at
the moment."Peter Moran- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text -

mainframetech<chough...@insidefsi.net> wrote:
J,
Thank you for the information. Peter may also appreciate it, since
he had asked me for that type of info. He might want the link to it.

Peter,
Please stop taking personal issue with what I say. I promise I'm
not out to insult you, only defend my point of view from your
viewpoint.

Artemisinin is not simply an alternative herb. Not if the Gates
Foundation is applying it to many patients for malaria. Malaria is not cancer, so quit trying to squeeze more out of this fact
than its worth. Or did you see anyone here saying it DIDN'T work as an
antimalarial?.

Interestingly enough, if you have a medical background you'll appreciate
that the scientists and doctors that have commented on the Artemisinin
studies say that it kills cancer in the same way it kills the malaria
parasite. It apparently is drawn to the iron-rich cancer (or malaria host)
cells and kills the cells (apoptosis?) when in the presence of an
overabundant amount of iron. It seems to leave the normal cells alone.
You can see where this method would be more able to kill cancer in the
fine interstices of the body that surgery or maybe directed radiation
might miss. Happily, because of the Gates Foundation, we know the
compound is safe for humans, and painless.another word from our magnanamous sponsor..
The fact that millions of asians took artemisinin without side-effects
long before Bill Gates made his first million doesn't seem to bother
you..

Again, I suggest to all seekers here to research 'Artemisinin' and
the 2 doctors that have been studying it; Drs. Henry Lai and Narendra
Singh at the University of Washington. This compound can be taken at
the same time as many other treatments and not get in the way. I think
there is only a problem with radiation therapy where you have to wait a
while. Have a look at the compound and make your decisions.in vitro stuff, as Peter mentioned.





Chris
J wrote:
PM wrote:

PM wrote:
IIRC their work was entirely in the test tube, and under very
artificial conditions at that (heavy iron loading of the cells that is
probably impractical in vivo). I am also unaware of any evidence that
Artemisin has yet shown any clinical effectiveness, i.e. effects on
cancer in humans, although I understand it is under study in some
places. Do you have any better evidence to present?

snipped some

This is a bit unfair. I actually checked Medline to see if there were
any recent
publications of clinical results from Artemisinin before I posted my
comments. . I even asked you politely if you had any clinical
evidence. I am trying to keep up to date on this kind of thing all
the time.

There's one case report, 6 years ago here
http://www.onk.ns.ac.yu/archive/Vol10/PDFVol10/V10n4p279.pdf> A
seventy-two year old vegetarian male with a long history of tobacco
chewing and smoking was admitted to Vivekanand Hospital (Meerut, India)
on December 15, 2000.One case = anecdote..

stage II cancer of the larynx (T2 N1 M0). A diagnosis of differentiated
squamous cell carcinoma was established after histopathological
examination of a biopsy from the growth. The patient complained of
plained of progressive hoarseness, and loss of appetite and weight for
the last eight months. Physical examination revealed enlarged cervical
lymph nodes on the right side of the neck

Laryngoscopic examination showed a growth on the right side of the
larynx. The growth was covering the right vocal cord, right pyriform
fossa, ventral aspect of epiglottis, and adjacent area of the lateral
pharyngeal wall. The surface of the growth was irregular, nodular,
ulcerated and bled on touch. Its size was approximately 3 cm x 2.5 cm x
3 cm=22.5 cmsounds more advanced than a T2 BTW..

[He'd had intermittent pain and swallowing difficulties for the previous 6
months. - me summarizing]

artesunate treatment was started on 01/22/2001. On day one of treatment,
a capsule containing ferrous sulfate (150 mg) and folic acid (0.5 mg)
was given orally at 2:00 PM after a meal. Injections of artesunate (60
mg I.M. per day; were given from day one (01/22/2001) to day 15
(02/05/2001) at 10:00 PM of each day.There's the commercial opportunity: sell it in a combination pack!

The patient had a fever (100-101°F) from day four to day seven of the
treatment. Within two weeks of the treatment, his voice became clear.
The patient was able to take solid foods quite comfortably. He regained
a good appetite. Clinical examination revealed cervical lymph nodes were
reduced in size. Without treatment, laryngeal cancer patients die within
an average of 12 months (1). The patient lived for nearly one year and
eight months (until his death on 1/11/02 due to pneumonia) after the
appearance of symptoms, although treatment was discontinued after nine
months.Hmm.. artemisinin (not sure of artesunate) is cheaper than most
antibiotics that could have cured the pneumonia.
Was a PM done?





In an unrelated note, the patients had extensive patches of leukoderma
around his mouth, on fingers of both hands, which responded well to
artesunate treatment over the nine months of observation.

Since this case, several patients with different types of cancers have begun
treatment with artemisinin and its analogs with promising results.

Narendra P. SINGH
Krishna B. VERMA
Archive of Oncology 2002;10(4):279-80.
The authors are grateful to Miss Himani Singh for her help in preparation of
the manuscript."

No idea what happened to the other patients mentioned.
I think it says the author (Singh) can be contacted.
J

It is also insulting to assume that I ever dismiss alternative claims
without looking closely at the evidence. My web site shows the lengths
to which I have been prepared to go in that regard. I am certainly
uncompromising in expecting the highest standard of case reports or
other evidence in support of such important claims as to be able to
cure cancer. I think that puts me firmly on the side of the cancer
patient.

I have also not objected to cancer patients working from lower levels
of evidence if they wish. The rest of us, however, should be working
to make sure that those selling or promoting such treatments are giving
cancer patients accurate information. They rarely ever do, and that
is what I am about.

Peter Moran

www.cancerwatcher.com--
madiba- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text -

This is NOT how cancer research should be carried on

This is NOT how cancer research should be carried on

Well, I have to say I'm not overly convinced by some of the stuff
I've seen going on in the world of medical research these days either.
In the papers this fellow is faking his test results, that one is
leaning his numbers to match a conclusion, the other one there has an
unmentioned connection with a large drug company, etc. etc.

When I began looking into cholesterol and its effects on coronary
arteries I thought I was getting the results of highly intelligent,
well-thought out testing and conclusions. Then I read "The Cholesterol
Myths" by Uffe Ravnskov and I was led to believe many of the medical
workers were playing with the statistics and results to satisfy a pet
theory or large drug/food companies that had their checkbooks in mind.
Then I found a few doctors that also were saying Cholesterol is not the
big thing for stopping heart events like heart attacks, but
homocysteine is. (The medical community has now come to the point
where they will state that Homosteine level being high is a 'risk
factor' for heart disease'.) They say we have to take more Folic Acid,
Vitamin B6 and B12 and keep the homocysteine level down, which is aided
by a healthier diet with greens, etc.

The problem here is that for every doctor or respected member of the
medical community that says one thing, there is another that will say
the opposite. As patients, we are going to have to listen to what they
are saying, check into it and decide which one makes sense to us and go
with it. It's like ulcers; many of them were diagnosed as stress and
similar causes by reputable doctors until one courageous guy pushed his
idea that these ulcers were an infection cured by an antibiotic. When
he was finally listened to, I believe he won the Nobel prize, but it
took a while to get to that point while we all wallowed around in our
wrong diagnoses taking incorrect medicines for nothing.

I know this all sounds a bit off the wall, but I would suggest
doubting and researching almost any diagnosis you get from a doctor,
starting with a second opinion, then books and then the internet. In
my own experience, I might well have been in a bad way right now,
possibly dead, if I had believed the first 2 doctors I spoke with about
a particular physical problem.

Chris

mainframetech wrote:

When I began looking into cholesterol and its effects on coronary
arteries I thought I was getting the results of highly intelligent,
well-thought out testing and conclusions. Then I read "The Cholesterol
Myths" by Uffe Ravnskov and I was led to believe many of the medical
workers were playing with the statistics and results to satisfy a pet
theory or large drug/food companies that had their checkbooks in mind.
Then I found a few doctors that also were saying Cholesterol is not the
big thing for stopping heart events like heart attacks, but
homocysteine is.

This kind of thing gets wide publicity and can severely damage trust in
the medical profession. But it does so because everyone expects
highest ethical and scientific standards of doctors -- in surveys they
always comes in within the top two or three most trusted professions.

I suspect doctors were more trustworthy than most other occupations

Somehow the same standards are not expected of others who offer medical
treatments to seriously ill people. Why is that? And how does the
unsatisfactory behaviour of some doctors justify routinely abysmal
standards of ethical and scientific behaviour in a massive alternative
cancer industry?
I certainly agree with you that alternate medicine companies are no

This matter is widely misrepresented. I was involved in it, performing
endoscopies on ulcer patients at the time. It was very easy to show
that the germ was present in most ulcer patients, which was what the
Nobel prize winner showed. That was never in doubt.
I am not angry at any doctor for following the current rituals and

I understand that the pathologist who found the drug now alleges that
he encountered unwarranted medical skepticism But is it any wonder
that those of us entrusted with the direct care of patients waited
until there were enough longer term clinical studies (and with simpler
and safer treatment programs) to prove that long term ulcer healing
could be achieved by treating the germ? All this took time, but as
soon as the right data was available everyone came on board.

I know this all sounds a bit off the wall, but I would suggest
doubting and researching almost any diagnosis you get from a doctor,
starting with a second opinion, then books and then the internet. In
my own experience, I might well have been in a bad way right now,
possibly dead, if I had believed the first 2 doctors I spoke with about
a particular physical problem.

Even doctors making mistakes does not elevate poor behaviour in others.

"poor behavior" is a matter of opinion. How people react when a doctor makes a bad diagnosis may depend on what was going on at the time, and what the perceived intent of the doctor was, as well as a number of other factors. Doctors are human and as well as making mistakes, may be doing things for personal reasons, or just plain not care about patients and only be looking for the bucks.
Actually, Doctors or people in general may both be acting with poor