Follow by Email

Saturday, June 2, 2012

Macklin Medical Mission - The PD-! Story Continues

Macklin Medical Mission [New drug helps body’s Defence system Fight Cancer] New England Journal of Medicine Following on the very important path-finder work of Dr. Carl June at the University of Pennsylvania Oncology Clinic at the Abramson Oncology Research facility in Philadelphia and their published finding in the The New England Journal of Medicine on “translational white blood cellular therapy” in May of 2011 we now have the similar work being done by Dr. Suzan Topalian of the John Hopkins University in Baltimore Maryland - 1. One of the great frustrations for researchers in the war on cancer is that the body’s own defence system does not do a better job fighting the disease. Tumours, it turns out, have a molecular shield that repels attacks from the immune system. Now, a new study says, an experimental drug is showing promise in disabling that shield, unleashing the immune system and causing shrinkage of some lung, skin and kidney cancers that had defied treatment with existing drugs. “We are seeing responses in heavily treated patients — three different cancers, one drug,” Dr. Suzanne Topalian, a melanoma specialist at Johns Hopkins University and lead investigator in the study, said in an interview. “This is a group of patients whose life expectancy was measured in a few months.” The results are from an early clinical trial, and it is not clear whether the drug, developed by Bristol-Myers Squibb, will actually help people live longer. But Topalian said she was optimistic because when tumours did shrink, they often did not grow back again for more than a year. The study was discussed Friday at a news conference at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology and is being published online by the New England Journal of Medicine. The drug, which now goes by the unwieldy code name of BMS-936558, blocks a protein called PD-1. Such PD-1 inhibitors “could be the most exciting clinical and commercial opportunity in oncology,” analysts at Leerink Swann wrote last month. That is partly because such drugs might be able to treat a variety of cancers [including tumours found in breast cancers]. Bristol-Myers said it intended to begin more clinical trials later this year and early next year aimed at winning approval of the drug to treat non-small-cell lung cancer, kidney cancer and melanoma, which is a deadly skin cancer. Others pursuing drugs that block the action of PD-1 include Merck; the Genentech unit of Roche; Glaxo Smith Kline, working with a small Maryland company called Amplimmune; and Teva working with an Israeli biotech company, CureTech. The early trial, paid for in part by Bristol-Myers, involved 296 patients with various advanced cancers. Tumours shrank significantly in 18 percent of the lung cancer patients, 28 percent of the melanoma patients and 27 percent of those with kidney cancer. Those rates compare favourably with some existing drugs, according to Leerink Swann. But the drug did not appear to work for a small number of patients with prostate or colon cancer. And larger studies will be needed to determine whether freeing the immune system leads to side effects, like attacks on parts of the body besides the tumour. In terms of side effects, about 14 percent of the patients experienced a severe side effect and three patients died from inflammation of the lung that was apparently tied to the drug. Still, the results are an improvement to the approach of harnessing the immune system to fight cancer, a field that has had a history of failures. The process works like this - PD-1, which stands for programmed death 1, is a protein on the surface of activated T cells, the warriors of the immune system [carried by white blood cells]. If another molecule, called PD-L1, binds to PD-1, the T cell dies or becomes docile. This is apparently a way that the body regulates the immune system, to avoid an overreaction. But many cancer cells make PD-L1, which allows them to disarm the T cells just as they have been “informed by the body of an invading cell” and are coming to attack the tumour. The Bristol drug is a monoclonal antibody that blocks PD-1 from binding to PD-L1. Bristol-Myers won approval last year for a drug that removes a different brake on the immune system. That drug, Yervoy, can prolong the lives of people with melanoma [skin cancer], but the unleashed immune system can also lead to severe side effects, like colitis PD-1 blockers appear to free up the immune system only around the tumour, rather than more generally. That could mean that the PD-1 will have “fewer side effects and greater anti-tumour activity,” than drugs like Yervoy, Dr. Antoni Ribas, a melanoma specialist at the University of California, Los Angeles, said in an editorial being published in the New England Journal of Medicine. An Important Note: There is preliminary evidence that PD-1 blockers will not work in people whose tumours do not make PD-L1, as determined by studying a biopsy sample. That might allow the drug to be used only for patients most likely to benefit, researchers said. - - - - - - 2. A type of drug that helps the body's immune system attack tumours is showing promise. In early clinical trials involving several hundred patients with various kinds of advanced cancer, up to one-quarter of those who received the treatment saw their tumours shrink, and some are still alive more than a year later. The results are the latest good news for so-called immunotherapy treatments that work by overcoming a tumour's ability to evade the immune system. One way cancer cells escape destruction is by producing a protein on their surface, known as programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1), that locks onto a protein called PD-1 on T cells, a type of immune cell. When the two connect, that prevents T cells from detecting the tumour and signalling the immune system to attack. Researchers have hypothesized that giving people with tumours an antibody (a protein) that blocks either PD-1 or PD-L1 would keep the proteins from engaging and switching off T cells—and a small initial clinical trial of an anti-PD-1 drug confirmed that this strategy holds promise for treating cancer. So do two larger, multi-center studies of this approach, which are being presented today at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology in Chicago. When a group of 296 patients with five types of advanced cancer received an infusion of an antibody targeting PD-1 every 2 weeks, tumours shrank in 14 of 76 lung cancer patients, 26 of 94 melanoma patients, and 9 of 33 kidney cancer patients—an 18% to 28% response rate. Many patients have responded to the drug for a year or longer. "These are very encouraging signals," says melanoma researcher Suzanne Topalian of Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, a leader of the multi-center study. In a separate study at Hopkins and elsewhere in which 207 cancer patients received an antibody that blocks PD-L1, 10% to 17% of those with one of three types of cancer have responded, and some patients have responded for at least a year. As with most early drug studies, the trials were predominantly designed to test safety; more studies are needed to show whether those receiving the antibodies live longer than they would on conventional treatments. (Topalian says the 1-year survival results are encouraging, however. In other studies, advanced melanoma patients on standard treatment lived for 6 to 7 months on average.) And the drugs, both made by Bristol-Myers Squibb, can result in severe side effects: The anti-PD-1 drug caused three deaths from lung inflammation. Still, the fact that both drugs seem to have a clinical impact "says that this combined [PD-1/PD-L1] pathway is important as a target for cancer therapy," Topalian says. When researchers tested tumour samples from 42 of the patients receiving anti-PD-1, nine of 25 who responded had PD-L1 on their tumours, while none of those lacking PD-L1 on their cancer cells responded. That means a test for PD-L1 could potentially tell doctors which patients should get the drug, much as physicians now routinely test breast cancers to see if they should receive various hormone therapies. The two trials, whose results are also reported online today in The New England Journal of Medicine, have "broken the ceiling" of a 10% to 15% response rate for a similar strategy that targets a T-cell protein called CTLA-4, says oncologist Antoni Ribas of the University of California, Los Angeles, who wrote an accompanying commentary in the journal. A CTLA-4-blocking antibody called ipilimumab was approved for melanoma treatment by U.S. regulators last year. But it seems to cause more side effects than anti-PD-1 drugs, probably because CTLA-4 is present on T cells in more tissues of the body. "The biggest feature of all these approaches is that it engages [an immune] memory response, so responses tend to be durable," says Ribas. Still, one significant remaining challenge is to get more patients to respond to the growing number of these immuno-therapy drugs. One way to do that may be to combine them with other treatments, Topalian says. - - - - - - - - - Clearly, what is needed in Canada is a comprehensive and integrated cancer control strategy outside of the control of the “cancer industry” to set and pursue a strategic methodology of promotion, prevention and screening of specific targets to not only get us back on track – while at the same time reviewing new cancer treatments – not just the reworking again and again two very olde sytems as we currently are – buty especially that of stem cell research and working with the body’s own defensive system – the white blood cel;s modified with “adepts” – re-introducing them back into the body in a new highly successful treatment to bring about the necrosis of cancer cells and tumours now under going very successful clincial trials which started in March of 2011 and being monitored by the Macklin Medical Mission in Canada. Your choice now is very simple – both you the private citizen, and the private corporation can decide on who and what to fund. We at the Macklin Medical Mission choose to raise funds for the support of bio-research dealing with T-Cells combined with white blood cells for the translational therapies now available and being developed to fight cancer rather than the harash and caustic methods used in archaic treatments found in radiology and chemotherapy with all their side effects especially for children and the elderly.The ethics are also simple – choose “inept” or “adept”. Thank you. Please note that this is a private sector initiative. Like so many research initiatives, the Government will catch up only when it decides to do so. They are always late to the table and cancer patients are dying daily because of it. Thank you for your financial support. Eric J. Macklin B.Com., FICB, FCSI, FMA, UE The Macklin Medical Mission [Est 1886] Chairman The Nancy-Griffon Foundation Inc [Est 1975] Canada YouTube: Macklin Medical Mission – Cancer Cure

Sunday, May 20, 2012

Macklin Medical Mission - The CRA

Macklin Medical Mission Children’s Oncology Center As seen in our previous Blogs regarding the Macklin Medical Mission this is a very old medical mission. It was created long before income tax and hence long before the Canadian income tax department and certainly long before income tax receipts were thought of for donations. And yet funds were raised and some very important tasks were completed and long before some very interesting doctors had to ask for permission to raise funds to do so. Important paediatric work was simply done especially in the field of children’s oncology. No brochures were made, no vast media campaigns were conducted and certainly no lotteries were instituted to raise funds for cancer research such as they are in Canada were 80% of all funds raised go to paying for print media, electronic media, glorious prizes such as cottages in Muskoka people couldn’t afford the municipal taxes on and hugely expensive cars and homes on Oakville which for 90% of folks couldn’t afford to insure let alone keep up. Yet this is the sad state of affairs for raising funds in Canada for cancer research. And of course there are the children and the elderly who have the toughest time of all due to their age and the awful effects of radiology, 135 years old and chemotherapy, which is 75 years old. The only people making the real money on the current state of fund raising for cancer in Canada are the executives at various media organizations and companies supplying the hugely expensive pieces of equipment and chemicals not to mention the six figures salaries paid to hospital executives and fund raisers for various cancer societies. And then there are the children. The Macklin Medical Mission, which was established in 1886, was originally funded by wealthy donors, doctors who cared, university societies and alumni and various medical missionaries in Canada, England and the United States. And no tax receipts were issued. Simply funds collected. And then there are the children. The Macklin Medical Mission is part of the Nancy-Griffon Fund Inc. The latter was an interest that several of the founding Directors had in two old historical craft – the GRIFFON and the NANCY. It also helped that Dr. Daisy Macklin was known as Griff and Dr. Christine Macklin was also known as Nancy – and they all loved to fish and vacation in Wasaga Beach. The Nancy-Griffon Fund Inc also known as the Foundation issues tax receipts for anything to do with Canadian marine heritage. In dealing with the Canada Revenue Agency [CSA] they want the Macklin Medical Mission to go the expense of developing printed matter such as printed brochures and printed pamphlets for the project. This is fine for mail outs to individuals. However, in developing a $24 million dollar fund raising objective and considering the laws around charitable giving in Canada for individuals this is hardly worth the effort, since it is already in electronic form right here on the Internet. Hard copy brochures and the like are vastly out of date, especially when the CSA wants all that prior to giving the Macklin Medical Mission permission is issue receipts for income tax purposes. With the current set-up for fund raising in Canada for a whole host of causes, including the “industry of raising funds for cancer in Canada” which are charitable by law and in keeping with tax law as it currently stands, lotteries are the way to go. Not us. We are in the 21st century. Going to the expense of hard copy material considering the pace of change in cancer research would only bring us into that milieu of excessive costs in raising funds for cancer such as the ubiquitous hospital lotteries and the like in Canada. All reference material for the Macklin Medical Mission will be found on the Internet and on our website for only those sponsors capable of reading the electronic media including Facebook for the Macklin Medical Mission. For those in the public domain who can not read the various forms of electronic media, it would be safe to say that their support of the Macklin Medical Mission would simply not be there in any meaningful fashion considering the complexity of the issues at hand. Once the Macklin Medical Mission, and the Children’s Oncology Group is up and running then dealing with those who are in need care would of course affect the whole spectrum of the public. Like cancer research which is global in nature, as is the affliction, those centers of excellence need our financial support. The team lead by Dr. Carl H. June at the Abramson Cancer Research Center at the University of Pennsylvania is one such center and one we have chosen to support, in much the same way that American companies here in Canada support some of our Canadian projects over the years. This is also in line with our earlier work internationally. For current news around clinical trials and the process of “translational white blood cell therapy for cancer” and the ultimate cure of leukemia as the first stage we refer you to: http://www.centredaily.com/2012/05/18/3200041/philipsburg-girl-on-road-to-recovery.html#storylink=omni_popular%23wgt=pop Note - that is did not turn up on your door step in any form of print media. Facebook does not allow for room covering this topic other than a “heads-up” and the Nancy-Griffon Fund Inc website which is for basic information only. Your choice now is very simple – both for you as the private citizen and the private corporation can decide who and what to fund. The ethics are also simple – choose “cure” over “treatment”. This is a private sector initiative. The Government will catch up only when it decides to do so. They are always late to the table. We are not being critical, just realistic. Thank you. Eric J. Macklin B.Com., FICB, FCSI, FMA, UE Macklin Medical Mission [Est 1886] Chairman The Nancy-Griffon Foundation Inc [Est 1975] Canada YouTube: Macklin Medical Mission – Cancer Cure

Tuesday, January 10, 2012

Macklin Medical Mission - Cancer Vanishes Without Treatment (2)

Cancers Can Vanish Without Treatment, but How?
[or, Cancer Cured by High IQ White Blood Cells]


Call it the arrow of cancer. Like the arrow of time, it was supposed to point in one direction. Cancers grew and worsened. [But not for everyone – why - Our little Friends – The Mighty White Blood Cells.

But as a paper in The Journal of the American Medical Association noted last week, data from more than two decades of screening for breast and prostate cancer call that view into question. Besides finding
tumours that would be lethal if left untreated, screening appears to be finding many small tumours that would not be a problem if they were left alone, undiscovered by screening. They were destined to stop growing on their own or shrink, or even, at least in the case of some breast cancers, disappear. [For some of us White blood cells – long known as the body’s army cells dealt with them in a timely fashion]

“The old view is that cancer is a linear process,” said Dr. Barnett Kramer, associate director for disease prevention at the National Institutes of Health. “A cell acquired a mutation, and little by little it acquired more and more mutations. Mutations are not supposed to revert spontaneously.”

So, Dr. Kramer said, the image was “an arrow that moved in one direction.” But now, he added, it is becoming increasingly clear that cancers require more than mutations to progress. They need the cooperation of surrounding cells and even, he said, “the whole organism, the person,” whose immune system or hormone levels, for example, can squelch or fuel a tumour.
Cancer, Dr. Kramer said, is a dynamic [two way process] process.

It was a view that was hard for some [indeed many] cancer doctors and researchers to accept. But some of the skeptics have changed their minds and decided that, contrary as it seems to everything they had thought, cancers can disappear on their own. [Hence in terms of over all survival for the human race, cancer is simply incapable of killing us all off – as white blood cells adapted to the presence of cancerous cells step forward for the most of us - as we shall see]

“At the end of the day, I’m not sure how certain I am about this, but I do believe it,” said Dr. Robert M. Kaplan, the chairman of the department of health services at the School of Public Health at the University of California, Los Angeles, adding, “The weight of the evidence suggests that there is reason to believe.”

Disappearing tumours are well known in testicular cancer. Dr. Jonathan Epstein at Johns Hopkins says it does not happen often, but it happens.
A young man may have a lump in his testicle, but when doctors remove the organ all they find is a big scar. The tumour that was there is gone. Or, they see a large scar and a tiny tumour because more than 95 percent of the tumour had disappeared [destroyed by white blood cells which identified cancer cells as non-normal cells as they are supposed to, and simply removed as waste by the body’s own system] on its own by the time the testicle was removed.

Or a young man will show up with a big tumour near his kidney. Doctors realize that it started somewhere else, so they look for its origin. Then they discover a scar in the man’s testicle, the only remnant of the original cancer because no tumour is left.

Testicular cancer is unusual; most others do not disappear. But there is growing evidence that cancers can go backward or stop, and researchers are being forced to reassess their notions of what cancer is and how it develops.

Of course, cancers do not routinely go away, and no one is suggesting that patients avoid treatment because of such occasional occurrences.
“Biologically, it is a rare phenomenon to have an advanced cancer go into remission,” said Dr. Martin Gleave, a professor of urology at the University of British Columbia.

But knowing more about how tumours develop and sometimes reverse course might help doctors decide which tumours can be left alone and which need to be treated, something that is now not known in most cases.
Cancer cells and pre-cancerous cells are so common that nearly everyone by middle age or old age is riddled with them, said Thea Tlsty, a professor of pathology at the University of California, San Francisco. That was discovered in autopsy studies of people who died of other causes, with no idea that they had cancer cells or pre-cancerous cells. They did not have large tumours or symptoms of cancer. “The really interesting question,” Dr. Tlsty said, “is not so much why do we get cancer as why don’t we get cancer?” [For a great many of us white blood cells adapt at the presence of pre-cancerous cells and take the necessary remedial action before things get out of hand.]

The earlier a cell is in its path toward an aggressive cancer, researchers say, the more likely it is to reverse course [with the presence of adaptive white blood cells]. So, for example, cells that are early precursors of cervical cancer are likely to revert. One study found that 60 percent of pre-cancerous cervical cells, found with Pap tests, revert to normal within a year; 90 percent revert within three years.

[For those who don’t and cancer takes hold, their white blood cells can be with withdrawn and in a lab “adapted” or “translated” with “cancer-like” cells with the help of T-cells and then re-introduced back into the host body and “off they go” killing all cancerous material and tumours within a matter of weeks. This process is currently in clinical trials as we speak and works on cancer patients no matter what stage the cancer is in.]

And the dynamic process of cancer development appears to be the reason that screening for breast cancer or prostate cancer finds huge numbers of early cancers without a corresponding decline in late stage cancers.

If every one of those early cancers were destined to turn into an advanced cancer, then the total number of cancers should be the same after screening is introduced, but the increase in early cancers should be balanced by a decrease in advanced cancers. [Hence the presence of adapted white blood cells]

That has not happened with screening for breast and prostate cancer. So the hypothesis is that many early cancers go nowhere [and not on their own]. And, as with breast cancer, there is indirect evidence [actually very direct and very significant evidence] that some actually disappear. [There is only one mechanism that the body has that can do this and this is the white blood cell hard at work.]

It is harder to document disappearing prostate cancers; researchers say they doubt it happens. But it does. Instead, they say, it “seems” as if many cancers start to grow then stop or grow very slowly, as has been shown in studies like one now being done at Johns Hopkins. When men have small tumours with cells that do not look terribly deranged, doctors at Johns Hopkins offer them an option of “active surveillance.” They can forgo having their prostates removed or destroyed and be followed with biopsies. If their cancer progresses, they can then have their prostates removed.
Almost no one agrees to such a plan. “Most men want it out,” Dr. Epstein said. But, still, the researchers have found about 450 men in the past four or five years who chose active surveillance. By contrast, 1,000 a year have their prostates removed at Johns Hopkins. From following those men who chose not to be treated, the investigators discovered that only about 20 percent to 30 percent of those small tumours progressed. And many that did progress still did not look particularly dangerous, although once the cancers started to grow the men had their prostates removed.

In Canada, researchers are doing a similar study with small kidney cancers, among the few cancers that are reported to regress occasionally, even when far advanced [as a result of white blood cells].

That was documented in a study, led by Dr. Gleave that compared an experimental treatment with a placebo in people with kidney cancer that had spread throughout their bodies.

As many as 6 percent who received a placebo had tumours that shrank or remained stable. The same thing happened in those who received the therapy, leading the researchers to conclude that the treatment [with out white blood cells] did not improve outcomes.[of course not!]

The big unknown is the natural history of many small kidney tumours, many of which are early kidney cancers. How often do small tumours progress? Do they ever disappear? Do they all need surgical excision? At what stage do most kidney cancers reach a point of no return?

These days, Dr. Gleave said, more patients are having ultrasound or CT scans for other reasons and learning that there is a small lump on one of their kidneys. In the United States, the “accepted practice” is to take those tumours out. But, he asks, “Is that always necessary?”

His university [University of British Columbia] is participating in a countrywide study of people with small kidney tumours, asking what happens when those tumours are routinely examined, with scans, to see if they grow. About 80 percent do not change or actually regress over the next three years [due in large part to the necrotic activity of white blood cells in the body with the dead cells being taken away and cast off by the body’s own waste system].

With early detection, he said, “our net has become so fine that we are pulling in small fish as well as big fish.” Now, he said, “we have to identify which small fish we can let go.”

Thank you.

Your financial support for the Macklin Medical Mission would be sincerely appreciated. Thank you.

Eric J. Macklin B.Com., FICB, FCSI, FMA, UE
Macklin Medical Mission [Est 1886]
Chairman
The Nancy-Griffon Foundation Inc [Est 1975]
Canada
YouTube: Macklin Medical Mission – Cancer Cure

By: Gina Kolata and
Published: October 26, 2009
Edited: by Eric Macklin
Published: January 08, 2012
Macklin Medical Mission

Sunday, January 1, 2012

Macklin Medical Mission - Cancer Vanishes without Treatment (1)

Where Cancer Disappears on its own due to White Blood Cells
[or, Cancer Cured by High IQ White Blood Cells]

In a new series on cancer we will be publishing a few articles that deal with the human body’s own self-defence mechanisms that are either triggered by foods high in anti-oxidants or simply by the body’s own innate self defence via the white blood cells themselves without any “boosting” from lab work with the aid of T-cell modifications. In other words white blood cells with a high-IQ. Hence the reason that cancer does not affect all of us “being less prone” as they say without some genetic weakness or proclivity in the family gene pool. So here we go.

Several years ago, I had a man seeking asparagus for a friend who had cancer. He gave me a photocopied copy of an article, entitled, `Asparagus for cancer' printed in Cancer News Journal, December 1979. I will share it here, just as it was shared with me:

"I am a biochemist, and have specialized in the relation of diet to health for over 50 years. Several years ago, I learned of the discovery of Richard R. Vensal, D.D.S. that asparagus might cure cancer. Since then, I have worked with him on his project, and we have accumulated a number of favourable case histories. Here are a few examples.

Case No. 1, man with an almost hopeless case of Hodgkin's disease (cancer of the lymph glands) who was completely incapacitated. Within 1 year of starting the asparagus therapy, his doctors were unable to detect any signs of cancer, and he was back on a schedule of strenuous exercise.

Case No. 2, a successful businessman 68 years old who suffered from cancer of the bladder for 16 years. After years of medical treatments, including radiation without improvement, he went on asparagus. Within 3 months, examinations revealed that his bladder tumour had disappeared and that his kidneys were normal.

Case No. 3, a man who had lung cancer. On March 5th 1971 he was put on the operating table where they found lung cancer so widely spread that it was inoperable. The surgeon sewed him up and declared his case hopeless. On April 5th he heard about the asparagus therapy and immediately started taking it. By August, x-ray pictures revealed that all signs of the cancer had disappeared. He is back at his regular business routine.

Case No. 4, a woman who was troubled for a number of years with skin cancer. She finally developed different skin cancers which were diagnosed by a skin specialist as advanced. Within 3 months after starting on asparagus, her skin specialist said that her skin looked fine and no more skin lesions. This woman reported that the asparagus therapy also cured her kidney disease which started in 1949. She had over 10 operations for kidney stones, and was receiving government disability payments for an inoperable, terminal, kidney condition. She attributes the cure of this kidney trouble entirely to the asparagus.

I was not surprised at this result, as `The elements of materia medica', edited in 1854 by a Professor at the University of Pennsylvania, stated that asparagus was used as a popular remedy for kidney stones. He even referred to experiments, in 1739, on the power of asparagus in dissolving stones. We would have other case histories but the medical establishment has interfered with our obtaining some of the records. I am therefore appealing to readers to spread this good news and help us to gather a large number of case histories that will overwhelm the medical skeptics about this unbelievably simple and natural remedy.

For the treatment, asparagus should be cooked before using, and therefore canned asparagus is just as good as fresh. I have corresponded with the two leading canners of asparagus, Giant and Stokely, and I am satisfied that these brands contain no pesticides or preservatives. Place the cooked asparagus in a blender and liquefy to make a puree, and store in the refrigerator. Give the patient 4 full tablespoons twice daily, morning and evening. Patients usually show some improvement in from 2-4 weeks. It can be diluted with water and used as a cold or hot drink. This suggested dosage is based on present experience, but certainly larger amounts can do no harm and may be needed in some cases.

As a biochemist I am convinced of the old saying that `what cures can prevent'. Based on this theory, my wife and I have been using asparagus puree as a beverage with our meals. We take 2 tablespoons diluted in water to suit our taste with breakfast and with dinner. I take mine hot and my wife prefers hers cold. For years we have made it a practice to have blood surveys taken as part of our regular checkups.

The last blood survey, taken by a medical doctor who specializes in the nutritional approach to health, showed substantial improvements in all categories over the last one, and we can attribute these improvements to nothing but the asparagus drink. As a biochemist, I have made an extensive study of all aspects of cancer, and all of the proposed cures. As a result, I am convinced that asparagus fits in better with the latest theories about cancer.

Asparagus contains a good supply of protein called histones, which are believed to be active in controlling cell growth via the red blood cells. For that reason, I believe asparagus can be said to contain a substance that I call cell growth normalizer. That accounts for its action on cancer cells which are abnormal in the body and in acting as a natural general body necrotic on cells unknown to the red blood cells and as a tonic. In any event, regardless of theory, asparagus used as we suggest, is a harmless substance.

The FDA cannot prevent you from using it and it may do you much good." It has been reported by the US National Cancer Institute, that asparagus is the highest tested food containing glutathione, which is considered one of the body's most potent anti-carcinogens and anti-oxidants carried through the body via the white blood cells.
Its interesting that modern research into modified white blood cells with T-Cells to educate white blood cells to locate and recognize cancer cells for what they are is the path to go now. For some of us, this process is natural, for some of us, the white blood cells require a bio-nudge so to speak to kill the invasive cancer cells.

Thank you.

Your financial support for the Macklin Medical Mission would be sincerely appreciated. Thank you.

Eric J. Macklin B.Com., FICB, FCSI, FMA, UE
Macklin Medical Mission [Est 1886]
Chairman
The Nancy-Griffon Foundation Inc [Est 1975]
Canada
YouTube: Macklin Medical Mission – Cancer Cure