Cancer Cure Coming to Toronto 2015

The Cure to Cancer

The Macklin Medical Mission

Further to our discussions in earlier Blogs about the cure to cancer which has been available since the spring of 2012 and is now effective against leukaemia and melanoma, we would now like to discuss the success of ever larger clinical trails in the United States. The two major centres for research are of course the M.D. Anderson Center in Houston and of course the cancer research centre at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. For this discussion our focus will be on the very successful research being undertaken at the Abramson Family Cancer Research Center in Pittsburgh which has now expanded to the Children’s Hospital in Philadelphia (CHOP). In this regard their primary focus is children's leukaemia up to the age of 18 stages one through four - the cure.

So if you have a child with leukaemia - this is the answer to your prayers.

To retrace our steps for a bit before we get going you should remember that cancer is a virus and hence oncology. So just as we don.t treat the common virus such as flu with surgery or chemicals or radiology then why have we been treating cancef the population through our auto-immune r this way for the last 140 years. No illness can wipe out all of us and in the line of thinking cancer will be cured by a third osystem which is to say through our white blood cells. Both white and red blood cells form the hematological base of our bodies. Red blood cells carries oxygen and white blood cells or leukocytes, which are our army cells, do all the work requested by the auto-immune system.

having said that then it should be pointed out that at the very worst cancer can only kill about a third of the human population if left unchecked. A third of the population has a sufficiently strong enough auto-immune system combined with white blood cells to kill cancer in any form. Another third basically holds cancer in check and will die from other ailments, while the remaining third are the ones we see in cancer clinics. 

Even with chemo-therapy which has been around in some form or other since the mid 1940,s and radiology which has been around since 1886 (burn therapy) most of them will eventually die with a few induced clear periods and a greatly reduced auto-immune system combined with radiology but they will never be cured. The approach for the last 150 years since we knew what we were dealing with has been in completely the wrong direction.

The real oncologists are doctors with a Phd in Bio-medicine not the average doctor who calls him or herself an oncologist in the hospitals. In fact all doctors in Ontario, Canada in our hospitals are “contract doctors” who see each and every cancer patient as a $70,000 billing point. They can not proscribe any new procedures unless it has been fully approved by OHIP so as not to risk their licence - even when they know there is a very successful treatment in the United States.

As in our previous Blogs those with cancer are treated in the United States as if the the cancer is a virus and so it should be. In Canada, its pull out the scalpel, order up some radiology and start injection and proscribing chemicals. Lets destroy the auto-immune system system and hope for the best. Fantastic. Hell they are going to die anyways lets just help them on their way … and collect $75,000 per patient along the way. And the sliding scale of Stage One through Four is not helpful either. Canadian medicine at its best.

So what do we do here in Ontario other than pray for those with cancer. 

We bring the treatment of cancer as a virus up from the United States and bring it to one of our hospitals for clinical trials here right under the nose of the doctors here and our precious OHIP. 

No scalpel, no chemo and no radiology. Those can now be placed in the museum were they belong and we treat cancer as a virus - no mater what stage it is in and cure it within weeks - and without ANY side effects - other than being cured of course. 

So lets star with children’s leukaemia shall we. By all means. rather than marching our children with cancer off to the local witch doctors - oopps did I say that - lets just call them doctors without a cure. Treatment sure and compassion sure - BUT NO CURE. 

As a parent you chose - Going through hell with chemo and radiology and dying - or life without side effects and the cure. 

I’ve seen this offer go to two children with leukaemia here in Ontario and the doctors here dissuaded the parents from opting for the cure. How sad is that. Actually it’s worse than sad - its pathetic but they kept their billing point at $75,000.

This is 2014 - next year being 2015 the clinical trial studies are being brought up to Canada as I have previously induced - under licence of course - and we expect and have requested that Toronto Sikc Kids will be one of them. 

The treatment for leukaemia is so successful in the cure rate that it does”t matter which stage the patient is in with cancer. Unbelievable. Even stage four and with tumours. All gone in six to eight weeks. Yes GONE - CURED. So you have a child with a four pound tumour - try lifting four pounds of butter and image it gone in eight (8) weeks and your child is cured - then image the current cancer treatment process as it stand now. 

You are the parent - you chose - take your time - its only your child’s life - not hard is it.

I know the doctors who both created the cure (you can read about it on Google - New England Journal of Medicine) and the lead doctors at the Children’s Hospital in Philadelphia. They are the best of the best. Actually they are the very best of the very best. AND they are bringing it here next year.    

So what is the cost to you the patient. Other than the cost for the stay in Toronto - McDonald’s House will not be able to handle everyone - is the cost of housing for the family - the cost of the treatment is carried by the pharmaceutical company and the cost of the clinical trials itself. In most case its carried by a company in the United States under a licensing agreement with the hospital and the company. 

Just to have your case reviewed and profiled in the US would cost your $25,000 US funds. here ists nothing and for once OHIP actually is beneficial for the cancer patient. The actual process is discussed in a previous Blog so we don’t need to do that again. 

So what’s in kit for the Macklin Medical Mission? Nothing. Our Foundation is one of the oldest medical charities in Canada having stated in 1886 by Dr William E Macklin and Dr. Alfred H Macklin from the university of Toronto. Their story is also discussed in a previous Blog. Just a couple of doctors who graduated at he very top of their Class. The very best of the very best. 

So to support this move for the clinical trials from Philadelphia to Toronto - to bring the cure to cancer for leukaemia - we will be seeking your donations to help cover the cost of the patient’s stay in Toronto.

One other thing we discovered over our years in the charitable business in Canada is that 96% of all donations come from individuals - company donations even on a matching basis from corporations amour to a mere 3% - and that is in a good year. Why because the cancer cure helps people not companies.

And finally donating money to hospitals and the Canadian Cancer Center without proper financial guidance, which has been the case for over 100 years, means also supporting countless layers of bureaucracy and countless chemical companies and suppliers of out of date radiology machines as well as countless millions in salaries and benefits long before it benefits children. Countless lotteries have also wasted and continue to waste money and donations and are expensive to operate - the proof is that they simply have noting to show for the countless millions raised in a myriad of venues and donated to them - ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! - on-going so called “treatments” without a cure IS nothing.

So yes - we are asking for your generous donation - to help kids be cured of leukaemia. Using the]same process will also cure breast cancer - or any other cancer and that’s next … 

So if you have cancer or know of anyone who has cancer - especially children with leukaemia- the door is now open and this is the way-out.   

*    *    *    *    *    *

However, just as it is in the United States, 95% of all cancer funding comes from individuals just like you and me. There are a number of ways in which you can make a donation to this program at the Macklin Medical Mission sponsored by the Nancy-Griffon Foundation, visit the following:

1.  www.thenancygriffonfund.com    and print the donations forms on the web page and mail it to us

2.  Or send your draft or money order to the CIBC at 23 Mapleview Dr West in Barrie [Manager]

3.  Or send your draft or money order to the TD at 60 Mapleview Dr West in Barrie [Manager]

All personal donations should be by way of a Money Order or a Draft drawn on a Canadian or American bank and the minimum is $100 in order to receive a tax receipt. Corporate donations can be made by way of a corporate cheque. Corporate tax receipts start at $1000. Please include your name and return address. 

If you work for a corporation, please ask your company to support this new program. We all know some one who has died from cancer, is dying from cancer or is in the process of receiving treatment for cancer and is undergoing radiation of chemotherapy or both with the possibility of surgery. Its time to stop and look at what the future holds for them and the rest of us. One both you the private citizen and the private corporation can decide who and what to fund. The ethics are also simple – choose “inept” or “adept”. The larger labs have failed us – thought they can replicate us; the larger cancer fund raising programs have failed because they failed to finance the smaller labs. It’s the story of the small Dr. Banting lab in day, we too may walk in their shoes. 

Your choice now is very simple – this is a defining moment -the little town of Alliston which discovered insulin so many years ago - all over again. But now you know, thankfully to the Macklin Medical Mission and the internet. 

Like so much else in cancer research - this is a private sector initiative - and a very successful one. The Government including OHIP will catch up only when it decides to do so. They are always late to the table. It’s your choice now, whether this takes three years, whether it takes four years, whether it takes five years; and how many more children and others have to die from cancer when they don’t have to. 

But clinical trails will be here next year. And due to current financial restrictions you will not find this arriving at your front door or your local mail box as a solicitation letter. This is it. Like everything else we do, we are only using modern technology.

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

Eric J. Macklin  MBA., FICB, FCSI, FMA, UE

Managing Director

Macklin Medical Mission [Est. 1886]

Chairman

The Nancy-Griffon Foundation Inc [Est. 1975]

Website:   www.thenancygriffonfund.com

Youtube:   Breast Cancer - A New Direction

Blog: www.themacklinmedicalmission/blog

Cure for Cancer - Emergency Funding Notice for the Nancy Griffon Foundation Inc

The Nancy Griffon Fund Inc, the sponsor of the Macklin Medical Mission’s research into immunology as the ultimate cure for the cancer virus, is one of Canada’s oldest non-profit and we rely on donations and grants to carry on our work. If everyone reading this gave $20, we would only have to fundraise 1 day a year. www.thenancygriffonfund.com Please Donate today Thank you.

The Cancer Cure and How It Works - Macklin Medical Mission

White blood cells, or leukocytes (also spelled "leucocytes"), are cells of the immune system involved in defending the body against both infectious diseases, viruses. and foreign materials. Five different and diverse types of leukocytes exist in the body with different functions, but they are all produced and derived from a multi-potent cell in the bone marrow known as a hematopoietic stem cell. They live for about three to four days in the average human body. Leukocytes are found throughout the body, including the blood and lymphatic system. The physical properties of white blood cells (leukocytes), such as volume, conductivity, and granularity, may change due to activation, the presence of immature cells (T and B cells), or the presence of malignant leukocytes caused by viruses as in leukemia, and may be reported as Cell Population Data when a patient’s blood is tested. The name "white blood cell" derives from the fact that after centrifugation of a blood sample, the white cells are found in the buffy coat, a thin, typically white layer of nucleated cells between the sedimented (separated) red blood cells and the blood plasma. There are of course five (5) different types of white blood cells but for the sake of this discussion we will deal with the Lymphocyte as part of our discussion this month again on dealing with cancer and its cure. Of these there are B-Cells which releases antibodies and assists activation of the all important T cells. Among the T-Cells there are special T-Cells called CD4+th (T Helper Cells which activate and regulate T and B cells and CD8+cyto-toxix T-Cells along with virus-infected and tumour cells. Of particular interest are the γδ T cells which bridge between the innate and adaptive immune responses which bring about phagocytosis and necrosis of non-normal erratic cells. There are also the Regulatory (suppressor) T-Cells – these returns the functioning of the immune system to normal operation after infection; prevents auto-immunity – the natural killer cells for the virus-infected and tumour cells. Are you with us so far as we try to put this into layman’s language? So let us recap a bit. Lymphocyte Lymphocytes are much more common in the lymphatic system (Lymph-nodes). Lymphocytes are distinguished by having a deeply staining nucleus that may be eccentric in location (peculiar to a location – specialized as to loci)), and a relatively small amount of cytoplasm. The blood has three types of lymphocytes: · B Cells make antibodies that bind to pathogens to enable their destruction through necrosis. · T-Cells: o CD4+ helper T Cells: T cells having co-receptor CD4 are known as CD4+ T cells. These cells bind antigens presented by antigen-presenting cells via T-cell receptor interacting with a MHC-II complex on APC. Helper T cells coordinate the immune response and are the main focus of cancer killing white blood cells. For example, in acute HIV infection, these T cells are the main index to identify and codex the individual's immune system activity, which may range anywhere on a scale of 1 to 10. Same with cancer. o CD*+ cytotoxic T Cells: T cells having co-receptor of CD8 are known as CD8+ T cells. These cells bind antigens presented on MHC I complex of virus-infected cells such as cancer or tumour cells and kill them. All nucleated cells possess MHC I on their surfaces. o γδ T cells possess an alternative T-Cell receptor as opposed to CD4+ and CD8+ αβ T cells and share characteristics of helper T cells, cytotoxic T cells and natural killer of rogue virus cells – such as cancer. · Natural Killer Cells are able to kill cells of the body that have lost the MHC I molecule, as they have been infected by a virus or have become cancerous – an oncolvirus. This is the case for over two thirds of the human population as confirmed by autopsies world wide. · Un-Natural Killer Cells: For the remaining other third of the population that where oncolviruses get ahead of the body’s auto-immune system that they require modified nano-nuclear modification of the white blood cell with T-cells to recognize the cancer cell for what it is and to “get on with the job of necrosis and to recognize the MHC I molecule.” The MHC I Class Molecule MHC Class I molecules are one of two primary classes of major histo-compatibility complexes (MHC I) molecules (the other being MHC II class) and are found on nearly every nucleated cell of the body. Their function is to display fragments of proteins from within the cell to T-cells. Healthy cells will be ignored, while cells containing foreign proteins (or a foreign cellular matric – i.e. cancer) will be attacked by the immune system. Because MHC I Class molecules present peptides derived from cystolic proteins, the pathway of MHC I Class presentation is often called the “cytosolic or endogenous pathway”. Again for those patients whose auto-immune system and where their white blood cells do not recognize the oncolvirues through a non-acting MHC 1 complex then these patients need to have their white blood cells modified or translated with the “appropriately educated T-Cells” Or do we simply carry on with the cell killing chemotherapy and radiology which destroys or so depresses the patient’s auto-immune system that the patient dies of something else or more than often is open to a recurrence of the cancer or allows cancer to turn up somewhere else. So why then treat cancer when we already know how to cure it! Function of MHC I Class cells MHC I Class molecules bind peptides generated mainly from degradation of cytosolic proteins by the proteasome of the target cell. The MHC I + peptide complex is then inserted into the plasma membrane of the cell(s) in question. As a result the peptide is bound to the extra-cellular part of the MHC I Class molecule. Thus, the function of the MHC I Class is to display intra-cellular proteins to cytotoxic T Cells (CTLs) for necrosis. However, MHC I Class can also present peptides generated from exogenous proteins, in a process known as “cross-presentation” which is also used to modify white blood cells with T-Cells or in some cases B-Cells to then recognize oncolviruses to eliminate them. A normal cell will display peptides from normal cellular protein turnover on its MHC I Class, and CTLs (cytotoxic T Cells) will not be activated in response to them due to central and peripheral tolerance “matching mechanisms”. When a cell expresses foreign proteins (causing a non-match sequence), such as after viral infection, a fraction of the MHC I Class will automatically display these non-matching peptides on the cell surface. As a result of this non-matching foreign cell structure (chemical imbalance) , CTLs specific for the MHC:peptide complex will recognize and kill the presenting (foreign) cell. Alternatively, MHC I Class itself can serve as an inhibitory ligand (highlighted link) for Natural Killer Cells (NKs). A simple “reduction in the normal levels” of surface MHC I Class, a mechanism employed by some viruses during immune evasion or in certain tumours, will activate NK cell killing. In this way the auto-immune system has two ways of recognizing “abnormal cell structure(s)” and dealing with them through necrosis. Hence this gives clinical labs two methods of taking cells from the cancer patient and modifying them in the lab with T-cells and B-cells to “induce” NK’s and/or white blood cells to perform the process of necrosis on “non-indigenous” or “foreign molecular cellular structures” to the modified or “translated” white blood cells within the blood stream or organ structure within the body for recognition and timely disposal/removal. That is kill cancer and with that preserve the method of necrosis for the body (similar to a vaccine for any virus) so that if the cancer returned it is destroyed by the patient’s now “up-dated” auto-immune system as a permanent cure. Truly not a difficult process. And I say again - So why then treat cancer when we already know how to cure it! Effect of Viruses – Chief among them being Cancer In summary then, as I will leave the finer details of the chemical structure of MHC I Class molecules to the bio-chemists, the MHC’s are loaded with peptides generated from the degradation of ubiquitous and thus ubiquitinated cytosolic proteins in proteasomes. As viruses induce cellular expression of viral proteins, some of these products are tagged for degradation, with the resulting peptide fragments entering the endoplasmic reticulum and binding to MHC I molecules. It is in this way, the MHC I Class-dependent pathway of antigen presentation, that the virus infected cells signal T-cells that abnormal proteins are being produced as a result of a viral infection - cancer. The ultimate fate of the virus-infected cell is almost always the induction of apoptosis (programmed cellular death or necrosis) through cell-mediated immunity, reducing the risk of infecting other neighbouring cells. As an evolutionary response to this method of “immune surveillance”, many cancer viruses as well as others for that group of the human population where cancer cells take over are able to down-regulate or otherwise prevent the presentation of MHC I Class molecules on the cell surface. In contrast to cytotoxic T lymphocytes (T-Cells), and Natural Killer (NK) cells are normally “inactivated” or simply become “unrecognizable” cognizing (non-cognitive) MHC I molecules on the surface of cells. Therefore, in the absence of MHC I molecules doing their job, (the body’s Plan B) NK cells are activated and recognize the cell as aberrant, (abhorrent) suggesting they may be infected by viruses attempting to evade immune destruction. Several human cancers also show down-regulation of MHC I, giving negatively transformed cells the same survival advantage of being able to avoid normal immune surveillance designed to destroy any infected or transformed cells. Hence the requirement for re-educating some white cells through the process of nano-nuclear molecular medicine in the lab to make the white blood cell recognize the aberrant cell for what it truly is and eliminate it. As the Chairman of the Nancy-Griffon Foundation Inc and the Macklin Medical Mission I sincerely hope that this Blog in some small way helps to explain what is already available to deal with the scourge of the cancer oncolvirues and the body’ own auto-immune defence mechanism and in some cases for some people (a great many in most cases). And I say again - So why then treat cancer when we already know how to cure it! However, in Canada just as it is in the United States, 95% of all cancer funding comes from individuals just like you and me. There are a number of ways in which you can make a donation to this program at the Macklin Medical Mission sponsored by the Nancy-Griffon Foundation Inc - visit us at: 1. www.thenancygriffonfund.com and print the donations forms on the web page and mail it to us 2. Or send your draft or money order to the CIBC at 23 Mapleview Dr West in Barrie [Manager] 3. Or send your draft or money order to the TD at 60 Mapleview Dr West in Barrie [Manager] All personal donations should be by way of a Money Order or a Draft drawn on a Canadian or American bank and the minimum is $100 in order to receive a tax receipt. Corporate donations can be made by way of a corporate cheque. Please include your name and return address. If you work for a corporation, please ask your company to support this new program. We all know some one who has died from cancer, is dying from cancer or is in the process of receiving treatment for cancer and is undergoing radiation of chemotherapy or both with the possibility of surgery. Its time to stop and look at what the future holds for them and the rest of us. One day, we too may walk in their shoes. Your choice now is very simple – this is a defining moment - both you the private citizen and the private corporation can decide who and what to fund. The ethics are also simple – choose “inept” or “adept”. The larger labs have failed us – thought they can replicate us; the larger cancer raising programs have failed because they failed to finance the smaller labs. It’s the story of the small Dr. Banting lab which discovered insulin so many years ago all over again. But now you know, thankfully to the internet. 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. It’s your choice now, whether this takes three years, whether it takes four years, whether it takes five years; and how many more have to die from cancer when they don’t have to. And due to current financial restrictions you will not find this arriving at your front door as a solicitation letter. This is it. Like everything else we do, we are only using modern technology. Your financial support for the Macklin Medical Mission would be sincerely appreciated. Thank you. Eric J. Macklin MBA, FICB, FCSI, FMA, UE Chairman The Nancy-Griffon Foundation [Est. 1975] The Macklin Medical Mission [Est. 1886] See us at: www.thenancygriffonfund.com Youtube: Breast Cancer - A New Direction Facebook: www.facebook.com/eric.macklin

Biological Therapy For Cancer Treatment

First - What is biological therapy? Biological therapy (also called immunotherapy, biological response modifier therapy, or biotherapy) uses the body's immune system to fight cancer. The cells, antibodies, and organs of the immune system work to protect and defend the body against foreign invaders, such as bacteria or viruses. Physicians and researchers have found that the immune system might also be able to both determine the difference between healthy cells and cancer cells in the body, and to eliminate the cancer cells. For the cancer virus, there are as many variations of the “disease” as there are various types of body organs. Equally, and as a corollary then, there is one cure with as many variations as there are cancers due to the patient’s white blood cell and it’s ability to be amended, modified, translated or re-engineered as there are T-Cells and B-Cells to create a vaccine. Initially it is by blood group, then by type of organ (hence biopsies) to create the vaccine then by DNA group. Some vaccines will be ubiquitous to many, others will be a more specialized boutique vaccines - known as Bio-Logics. Biological therapies are designed to boost the immune system “to clue it in other words”, either directly or indirectly, by assisting in the following “bio-logical” process: · making cancer cells more recognizable by the immune system, and therefore more susceptible to destruction by the immune system · boosting the killing power of immune system cells · changing the way cancer cells grow, so that they act more like healthy cells · stopping the process that changes a normal cell into a cancerous cell · enhancing the body's ability to repair or replace normal cells damaged or destroyed by other forms of cancer treatment, such as chemotherapy or radiation · preventing cancer cells from spreading to other parts of the body. The immune system includes different types of white blood cells - each with a different way to fight against foreign or diseased cells, including cancer: · Lymphocytes - white blood cells, including B cells, T cells, and NK cells. · B cells - produce antibodies that attack other cells. · T cells - directly attack cancer cells themselves and signal other immune system cells to defend the body. · Natural killer cells (NK cells) - produce chemicals that bind to and kill foreign invaders in the body. · Monocytes - white blood cells that swallow and digest foreign particles. These types of white blood cells - B cells, T cells, natural killer cells, and monocytes - are in the blood and thus circulate to every part of the body, providing protection from cancer and other diseases. Cells secrete two types of substances: antibodies and cytokines. Antibodies respond to (harmful) substances that they recognize, called antigens. Specific (helpful) antibodies match specific (foreign) antigens by locking together. Cytokines are proteins produced by some immune system cells and can directly attack cancer cells. Cytokines are "messengers" that "communicate" with other cells. What are the different types of biological therapies? There are many different types of biological therapies used in cancer treatment, including the following: · non-specific immunomodulating agents Non-specific immunomodulating agents are biological therapy drugs that stimulate the immune system, causing it to produce more cytokines and antibodies to help fight cancer and infections in the body. Fighting infection is important for a person with cancer. · biological response modifiers (BRMs) Biological response modifiers (BRMs) change the way the body's defenses interact with cancer cells. BRMs are produced in a laboratory and given to patients to: o boost the body's ability to fight the disease. o direct the immune system's disease fighting powers to disease cells. o strengthen a weakened immune system. BRMs include interferons, interleukins, colony-stimulating factors, monoclonal antibodies, cytokine therapy, and of course bio-cellular vaccines: · vaccine therapy. Vaccine therapy is perhaps the primary new biological therapy to destroy cancer cells and related tumours by using the body’s own immune system through the use of modified, translational, enhancements, re-engineered white blood cells. For many this already works on its own, for others it needs a friendly nudge in the right direction and for others it’s a re-educational process with the use of the patient’s own T-Cells or in some cases B-Cells. The obvious benefit of a vaccine therapy has been proven time and time again. After all, cancer is simply an oncolvirues and should be treated as such. Again, and as with so many infectious diseases, vaccines are given A. before the disease develops, and of course B. after the disease develops. Cancer vaccines, however, are given after the disease develops, when the tumour is small, or now in so many cases when the tumour is in Stage Four. Scientists are testing the value of vaccines for class four negative breast cancer having successfully used it for leukemia and melanoma and other cancers. Sometimes, vaccines are combined with other therapies such as cytokine therapy – but it should be clearly noted that vaccines do work and have so for some time now. Are there side effects of biological therapies? As each person's individual medical profile and diagnosis is different, so is his/her reaction to any vaccine type treatment just as you would have had you had a cold. Side effects may be severe, mild, or absent. In all cases as the body discovers and reacts to an invasive virus the white blood cells go into action almost immediately and as part of the process the temperature of the body will rise as it “burns off” the “non-friendly” invader cells. Be sure to discuss with your cancer care team any/all possible side effects of treatment before the treatment begins as with any other treatment. Side effects of practically all biological therapy, which often mimic flu-like symptoms, vary according to the type of therapy/remedy given and may include the following: · fever · chills · nausea · vomiting · loss of appetite · fatigue Specifically, cytokine therapy often causes fever, chills, aches, and fatigue. Other side effects include a rash or swelling at the injection site. Therapy can cause fatigue and bone pain and may affect blood pressure. A “cytokine” is a natural body protein that acts as regulators of host (patient) and the various levels of responses to infection, immune responses, inflammation, and trauma which for the most part will results in increased body temperature – the body is “reacting” thanks to white blood cells suddenly “getting very busy”. Note: These side effects as sited pale “substantially” in comparison with those side effects experienced by chemotherapy (around since 1943) with a whole host of chemicals which destroy good and bad cells in their path and to varying degree most of which can not be restored, and radiology (burn treatment around since 1886) which also kills good and bad cells all the way through the body including the tell-tale burn on the skin front and back. Surgery – for biopsies yes … As a cancer treatment definitely not. (Hell just lop it off – right?) In all too many cases this vastly out-dated form of cancer “treatment” allows for the recurrence of cancer and so weakening the body’s auto-immune system (white blood cells combined with cytokines) to such a point that the patient will surfer a recurrence of the same and or other forms of cancer 40% of the time – especially the very young and the very old. So - Your choice now is very simple – this is a defining moment - both you the private citizen and the private corporation can decide who and what to fund. The ethics are also simple – choose “inept” or “adept”. The larger labs have failed us – thought they can replicate us; the larger cancer raising programs have failed because they failed to finance the smaller labs. It’s the story of the small Dr. Banting lab which discovered insulin so many years ago all over again. But now you know, thankfully to the internet. 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. It’s your choice now, whether this takes three years, whether it takes four years, whether it takes five years; and how many more have to die from cancer when they don’t have to. And due to current financial restrictions you will not find this arriving at your front door as a solicitation letter. This is it. Like everything else we do, we are only using modern technology. Your financial support for the Macklin Medical Mission would be sincerely appreciated. Thank you. Eric J. Macklin MBA., FICB, FCSI, FMA, UE Director Macklin Medical Mission [Est. 1886] Chairman The Nancy-Griffon Foundation Inc [Est. 1975] See us at: www.thenancygriffonfund.com Youtube: Breast Cancer - A New Direction Facebook: www.facebook.com/eric.macklin Twitter: http://twitter.com/beowolfe1 And: http://www.gofundme.com/2q7rfk Addendum For those of you in the computer industry think of bio-logics as compu-logics with white blood cells and T-cells as micro-bytes. Additionally I ask you to think of cancer in its many forms a variation on a theme much like the computer industry, in this case in terms of real life – Grand Theft Cancer as in pretend life – Grand Theft Auto. By extension in this comparison it will take the same amount of money and technicians to develop a cancer vaccine program for just one type of cancer (game of life) which is about $500 million and similarly for a computer program (pretend game of life) like Grand Theft Auto at $280 million. The cancer vaccines in all their variations will be sold for $200 to $300 per patient once in general use much like games are sold at $65 each to recover their research and development costs. In this case vaccines will outsell games 100 to one. Something to think about in the very near future.

Childhood Cancer and the Macklin Medical Mission

September Marks Childhood Cancer Awareness Month In Canada September 12 is set aside by the Nancy-Griffon foundation and its Macklin Medical Mission Project to Remember the hundreds of thousands of children, families and caregivers touched by childhood Cancer. Until now, advances in childhood cancer have been dramatic - 40 years ago cure rates were less than 10 percent; today, 80 percent overall are cured. Recognizing that there is more to be done. And the Canadian Federal Government needs to more to assist and to expand paediatric cancer research, awareness and to create the national childhood cancer research registry. “This year, 12,500 families will hear the words, ‘Your child has cancer.’ On behalf of the thousands of families, survivors, and caregivers, we at the nancy-Griffon Foundation remain united in our commitment to conquer childhood cancer. We applaud the Federal Government and the Provinces for proclaiming September 12 as National Childhood Cancer Awareness Day concurrent with our research affiliates in the United States,” said Eric Macklin, National Executive Director, the Macklin Medical Mission and the President of the Nancy-Griffon Foundation of Canada. “September as National Childhood Cancer Awareness month is a major opportunity to grow our community – both on the personal and corporate level to let people know that they can help us find a cure and help ensure that we can reach the day when every child with cancer is guaranteed a cure.” Despite the progress in childhood cancer research, about one in five children continues to die and cancer remains the #1 leading cause of childhood death from disease in Canada and the United States. More than 40,000 children and adolescents currently are being treated for childhood cancer. "Each day that paediatric cancer research goes under-funded, the road to discovering new treatments and cures become longer, and more children die - needlessly,” said Eric Macklin of the Macklin Medical Mission and the Children’s Oncology Group. With proper funding levels – we can conquer childhood cancer.” To ensure continued Federal support for childhood cancer research funding, the Canadian House of Commons and its representatives needs to form the first Pediatric Cancer Caucus - we need members of Parliament to be specifically dedicated to conquering childhood cancer and to support the efforts of the Nancy-Griffon Foundation. “Of the 12,500 children diagnosed with cancer each year, more than 2,000 of these young lives are unnecessarily lost,” said Eric Macklin. Dr. Lionel Macklin was the head of the paediatric oncology ward at the Toronto Sick Kids Hospital for a number of years and became particularly aware of the promise that cancer research could offer for so many children in this country. By allowing more patients to survive and improving their quality of life the Macklin Medical Mission both here in Canada and abroad especially in Nanjing China remains dedicated in its mission in fighting for the often voiceless victims of cancer of this horrible disease.” For the second year, the Macklin medical Mission and its “Virtual Walk for Millions” will unite people across the country in the fight against childhood cancer. In September, our challenge is to bring together 10,00 individuals virtually in support of the 10,00 kids who will be diagnosed each year. To recognize September as Childhood Cancer Awareness Month, the Macklin Medical Mission will use original signed artwork from its various sponsors through the Young Artist program (kids with cancer and their siblings donate art) to create a special line of mugs, t-shirts, bumper stickers and buttons to help raise funding for childhood cancer research. About the Macklin Medical Mission The Macklin Medical Mission (the oldest charity in Canada since 1886) sponsored by the Nancy-Griffon Foundation supports the work of the Macklin Oncology Group (COG), one of the world’s largest cooperative cancer research organization, that raises funds for children with cancer. Together with other centers, we are committed to completely conquering the final threshold of childhood cancer through scientific discovery and compassionate care. For more information, visit: www.thenancygriffonfund.com 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. Your financial support for the Macklin Medical Mission would be sincerely appreciated. Thank you. Eric J. Macklin MBA., FICB, FCSI, FMA, UE Director Macklin Medical Mission [Est. 1886] Chairman The Nancy-Griffon Foundation Inc [Est. 1975] See us at: Youtube: Breast Cancer - A New Direction Facebook: www.facebook.com/eric.macklin Twitter: http://twitter.com/beowolfe1 http://www.gofundme.com/2q7rfk

Radiation Therapy Can Make Cancers 30x More Malignant

Journal - CANCER Following on some of our previous posts articles such as these can only encourage the great many now and the great many to come who will get any one of a hundred types of cancer to join us at the Macklin Medical Mission in Canada which is sponsored by the NANCY-GRIFFON Foundation funding research into modified molecular medicine using patient’s white blood cells with their T-cells for a highly successful and unique 1:1 cancer cure for leukemia and melanoma. With your financial support we will apply the same technology for the treatment of breast cancer. It’s time to move beyond the outdated use of chemotherapy and radiology and move in a much needed new direction. Please support us. Youtube: Breast Cancer - A New Direction. www.thenancygriffonfund.com Following on the heels of recent revelations that x-ray mammography [radiology] may be contributing to an epidemic of future radiation-induced breast cancers, in a new article titled, “Radiation Treatment Generates Therapy Resistant Cancer Stem Cells from Aggressive Breast cancer Cells” - published in the journal Cancer July 1st, 2012, researchers from the Department of Radiation Oncology at the UCLA Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center report that radiation treatment actually drives breast cancer cells into greater malignancy. The researchers found that even when radiation kills half of the tumour cells treated, the surviving cells which are resistant to treatment, known as induced breast cancer stem cells (iBCSCs), were up to 30 times more likely to form tumours than the non-irradiated breast cancer cells. In other words, the radiation treatment regresses the total population of cancer cells, generating the false appearance that the treatment is working, but actually increases the ratio of highly malignant to benign cells within that tumour, eventually leading to the iatrogenic (treatment-induced) death of the patient. Last month, a related study published in the journal Stem Cells titled, "Radiation-induced reprogramming of breast cells," found that ionizing radiation reprogrammed less malignant (more differentiated) breast cancer cells into iBCSCs, helping to explain why conventional treatment actually enriches the tumour population with higher levels of treatment resistant cells. A growing body of research now indicts conventional cancer treatment with chemotherapy and radiation as a major contributing cause of cancer patient mortality. The primary reason for this is the fact that cancer stem cells, which are almost exclusively resistant to conventional treatment, are not being targeted, but to the contrary, are encouraged to thrive when exposed to chemotherapy and radiotherapy. In order to understand how conventional treatment drives the cancer into greater malignancy, we must first understand what cancer is.... What Are Cancer Stem Cells, And Why Are They Resistant To Treatment? Tumours are actually highly organized assemblages of cells, which are surprisingly well-coordinated for cells that are supposed to be the result of strictly random mutation. They are capable of building their own blood supply (angiogenesis), are able to defend themselves by silencing cancer-suppression genes, secreting corrosive enzymes to move freely throughout the body, alter their metabolism to live in low oxygen and acidic environments, and know how to remove their own surface-receptor proteins to escape detection by white blood cells. In a previous article titled “ Is Cancer an Ancient Survival Program Unmasked?” - we delved deeper into this emerging view of cancer as an evolutionary throw-back and not a by-product of strictly random mutation. Because tumours are not simply the result of one or more mutated cells "going rogue" and producing exact clones of itself (multi-mutational and clonal hypotheses), but are a diverse group of cells having radically different phenotypal characteristics, chemotherapy and radiation will affect each cell type differently. Tumours are composed of a wide range of cells, many of which are entirely benign. The most deadly cell type within a tumour or blood cancer, known as cancer stem cells (CSCs), has the ability to give rise to all the cell types found within that cancer. They are capable of dividing by mitosis to form either two stem cells (increasing the size of the stem population), or one daughter cell that goes on to differentiate into a variety of cell types, and one daughter cell that retains stem-cell properties. This means CSCs are tumourigenic (tumour-forming) and should be the primary target of cancer treatment because they are capable of both initiating and sustaining cancer. They are also increasingly recognized to be the cause of relapse and metastasis following conventional treatment. CSCs are exceptionally resistant to conventional treatment for the following reasons 1. CSCs account for less than 1 in 10,000 cells within a particular cancer, making them difficult to destroy without destroying the vast majority of other cells comprising the tumour. 2. CSCs are slow to replicate, making them less likely to be destroyed by chemotherapy and radiation treatments that target cells which are more rapidly dividing. 3. Conventional chemotherapies target differentiated and differentiating cells, which form the bulk of the tumour, but these are unable to generate new cells like the CSCs which are undifferentiated. The existence of CSCs explains why conventional cancer treatment has completely missed the boat when it comes to targeting the root cause of tumours. One reason for this is because existing cancer treatments have mostly been developed in animal models where the goal is to shrink a tumour. Because mice are most often used and their life spans do not exceed two years, tumour relapse is very difficult, if not impossible to study. The first round of chemotherapy never kills the entire tumour, but only a percentage. This phenomenon is called the fractional kill. The goal is to use repeated treatment cycles (usually six) to regress the tumor population down to zero, without killing the patient. What normally occurs is that the treatment selectively kills the less harmful populations of cells (daughter cells), increasing the ratio of CSCs to benign and/or less malignant cells. This is not unlike what happens when antibiotics are used to treat certain infections. The drug may wipe out 99.9% of the target bacteria, but .1% have or develop resistance to the agent, enabling the .1% to come back even stronger with time. The antibiotic, also, kills the other beneficial bacteria that help the body fight infection naturally, in the same way that chemotherapy kills the patient's immune system (white blood cells and bone marrow), ultimately supporting the underlying conditions making disease recurrence more likely. The reality is that the chemotherapy, even though it has reduced the tumour volume, by increasing the ratio of CSCs to benign daughter cells, has actually made the cancer more malignant. Radiotherapy has also been shown to increase cancer stem cells in the prostate, ultimately resulting in cancer recurrence and worsened prognosis. Cancer stem cells may also explain why castration therapy often fails in prostate cancer treatment. Non-Toxic Natural Substances Which Target and Kill CSCs (Cancer Stem Cells) Natural compounds have been shown to exhibit three properties which make them suitable alternatives to conventional chemotherapy and radiotherapy: 1. High margin of safety: Relative to chemotherapy agents such as 5-fluorouracil natural compounds are two orders of magnitude safer 2. Selective Cytotoxicity: The ability to target only those cells that are cancerous and not healthy cells 3. CSCs Targeting: The ability to target the cancer stem cells within a tumour population. The primary reason why these substances are not used in conventional treatment is because they are not patentable, nor profitable. Sadly, the criteria for drug selection are not safety, effectiveness, accessibility and affordability. If this were so, natural compounds would form an integral part of the standard of care in modern cancer treatment. Source: Journal for CANCER - by Ji Saver – June 26th 2013 Eric J. Macklin B.Com., FICB, FCSI, FMA, UE Macklin Medical Mission [Est 1886] Chairman The Nancy-Griffon Foundation Inc [Est 1975] See us at: Youtube: Breast Cancer - A New Direction Facebook: www.facebook.com/eric.macklin Twitter: http://twitter.com/beowolfe1 http://www.gofundme.com/2q7rfk

Charitable Giving in Canada

Charitable giving falling to fewer Canadians Number of donors decreasing but size of donations growing By David Simms of CBC News and drawn from Statistics Canada with additional comments provided by Eric Macklin of the Macklin Medical Mission [www.thenancygriffonfund.com] established in 1886 – 32 years before there was Federal charities tax code – and Cathy Barr of Imagine Canada established in 2003. Canadians are among the most generous people in the world, but there are worrisome signs that the responsibility of supporting charities is falling on fewer sets of shoulders. "Compared to other countries, Canada has a large and vibrant charitable sector," said Cathy Barr, senior vice-president of Imagine Canada, a national charitable organization that promotes Canada's charities and non-profit organizations [which like everyone else draws their stats from Stats Canada]. "Americans gave more than $298.42 billion in 2011 to their favorite causes despite the economic conditions. Total giving in 2012 was up 4 percent from $286.91 in 2011" said Eric Macklin, Chairman of the Nancy-Griffon Foundation Inc.. This slight increase is reflective of recovering economic confidence." As well, Eric says that: "In the U.S. the greatest portion of charitable giving, $217.79 billion, was given by individuals or household donors. Gifts from individuals represented 73 percent of all contributed dollars, similar to figures for 2011. Corporate Foundations gave $41.67 billion, accounting for 14 percent of all philanthropy Individual, bequest and estimated family foundation giving combined were approximately $262.61 billion or 88 percent of total giving in the USA." As a final note in regards to philanthropy Eric noted that: "Corporate giving, which is tied to cyclical corporate profits, held steady in 2012 compared with 2011, totaling $14.55 billion (a 0.1 percent decline in current dollars). Corporate giving accounted for only 5 percent of all charitable giving and slightly ahead of that in Canada which is running just over 2%. [or on a comparison U.S to Canada that would $14.55 billion/10/2 = $727.5 million]" In summary Eric noted that "Corporations donate about 4%, bequests about 8%, other Foundations about 14% and individuals accounting for the rest at 74%. This gives anyone in the fund raising business a fair idea as to how to target their market place. "Going forward we have a very long way to go to catch up to the Americans to fund research here in Canada and in terms of research results especially for that of cancer," said Eric Macklin of the Nancy-Griffon Foundation and their primary project being the Macklin Medical Mission fund raising program for Breast Cancer using the successful micro-molecular adaptation of the patient's white blood cells. But Barr says that while Canadians' generosity should be praised, a worrying trend has emerged in recent years. "The data over time shows that the percentage of Canadians donating to charity has been declining," she said. From a high of almost 30 per cent in the early 1990s, the proportion of taxpayers claiming charitable donations on their tax returns had fallen to 23 per cent by the 2011 tax year. The average annual donation, meanwhile, has climbed from $458 in 1984 to $1,437 (or $748 in 1984 dollars) by 2010, according to data compiled by Imagine Canada from Statistics Canada and Canada Revenue Agency figures. "We're getting a situation where fewer and fewer people are donating larger amounts," Barr said. Less than a 1/4 of tax filers claim donations From figures released from Stats Canada on February 13, 2013 showed that 5.71 million tax filers claimed charitable contributions for the 2011 tax year, down 0.6 per cent from the year earlier. Giving totalled $8.47 billion, up 2.6 per cent from 2010. The median donation nationally was unchanged from 2010, at $260. Average donations ranged from $430 for the 0 to 24 age group to $2,000 for those 65 and over. Manitoba had the highest percentage of tax filers declaring a donation, at 25.9 per cent, followed by Saskatchewan, at 25.0 per cent, and Prince Edward Island, at 24.9%. The metropolitan area with the highest median donation, for the 10th straight year, was Abbotsford–Mission, B.C., at $630. Calgary followed at $400, Vancouver and Victoria at $390, and Kelowna, B.C., and Saskatoon at $380. Statistics Canada qualified the numbers with the reminder that tax filers can carry donations forward for up to five years after the year in which they were made, which might skew year-to-year comparisons on the amount of giving. And spouses with higher incomes can also claim contributions made by their partners, which could mean the number of donors was actually higher than the number who claimed tax credits. Tax credit changes proposed That trend toward a shrinking donor pool has led Imagine Canada over the last two years to propose changes to the tax treatment of donations. It has recommended the introduction of something called the stretch tax credit, which would reward donors who exceed their previous highest level of giving with a larger credit. Currently, the federal tax credit allows taxable income to be reduced by 15 per cent of the value of total donations under $200 and by 29 per cent above that. [In the United States this is set at a maximum of 50% of all earned income.] Increase your personal highest total contribution amount, Imagine proposes, and the government would increase the credit to 25 per cent — for total donations at or below $200 — or 39 per cent, for total donations above $200 [approaching the levels in the US.] Barr says tax deductibility might not be the driving force that convinces people to donate, but there is evidence that donors give more because of it. Health, social services among top recipients Imagine Canada's aim with the stretch credit is to encourage more donors, especially more small donors, and to give charities something with which to engage and encourage their supporters to increase their giving. Exactly which causes are the closest to the hearts of Canadians depends on how you measure it. Based on the proportion of those who donate, Imagine Canada's data shows health and social services are the top cause, with more than 50 per cent of Canadians who give donating to health institutions and more than 40 per cent giving to social service organizations. A third give to religious organizations or institutions. Going by the size of donations, religious causes are at the top, with average donations of $450, followed by universities and colleges, at $300. Religious causes lead based on the proportion of the number of donations, accounting for 40 per cent of all charitable donations. But Barr says there's been a "fairly slow but clear" declining trend over the last decade in the share of donations going to religious causes, dropping from 45 per cent in 2004. Support for international causes, though still small, has increased from four per cent in 2004 to eight per cent in 2010. But that includes disaster relief, which might skew the results if there have been more high-profile natural disasters in certain years. Canada ranks high. Trying to determine how Canada's charitable activity compares with that of other countries is a challenge. A 2005 study by Johns Hopkins University and Imagine Canada suggested that out of 37 countries, only the Netherlands – at 14.4 per cent — surpassed Canada – at 11.1 per cent — in terms of the percentage of the economically active population that was either paid or volunteered in the non-profit sector. Britain's Charities Aid Foundation, in an analysis released a year later, complained that there is "very little standardized international data" on giving. But its data ranked Canada third in terms of giving as a percentage of GDP, at 0.72 per cent, behind the the United Kingdom, at 0.73 per cent and of course the number one country being the U.S., at 1.67 per cent. It is also noted that the rest of the world depends on the U.S. to lead in medical research for the benefit of the world. Not only is the U.S. number one in the world but statistics show that because of this that the rest of the world including the United Kingdom and Canada are at least ten years behind the U.S. in terms of cancer research. Both Eric Macklin, Chair of the Macklin Medical Mission, a charity that is the oldest in Canada and Cathy Barr of Imagine Canada have blunt advice for those Canadians concerned about the declining proportion of Canadians donating: "Get out there and donate especially to new research initiatives in the field of cancer research." [www.thenancygriffonfund.com] If you do that, there are some things you need to know in order to get the benefit of a tax credit. Make sure to get a receipt for the donation, one which has the charity's name and registration number, date, serial number, the donation amount, the donor's name and has been signed on behalf of the organization. Include these with your return if you file by paper, and store them away if you file online in case your return is reviewed by the CRA. Giving to charities in Canada makes you eligible for a non-refundable tax credit only, “rather than a deduction which is the case in the U.S. up to a maximum of 50% of all earned income, which means it can only be used to reduce tax owed, not taxable income again as is the case in the U.S., and there won't be any benefit if you don't owe any tax. A donor can get credit for donations up to a limit of 75 per cent of net income against tax owed which is usually 37% of earned income and explains the large disparity between Canada and the US”, says Eric Macklin of the Macklin Medical Mission. Eric goes on to say that: “Those Canadians who donate certified Canadian cultural property to museums and the like or ecologically sensitive conservation lands might be able to claim 100 per cent of income.” “And again, an estate can get a tax credit for up to 100 per cent of a deceased person's income — in the year of death and going back one year against taxes owed. As Eric Macklin says: this is 100% of 37% and includes dividends. Not the 50% of all earned income no matter what the source is in the U.S.” “The Canadian government sets the “tax filter for revenue to CRA so high that it discourages many Canadian from the act of giving in the first place especially corporations which now require their participation to be based on employee participation for tax purposes.” Usually, the tax savings equal the tax credit. But there are exceptions: · Residents of Quebec are entitled to an overall abatement of 16.5 per cent on their basic federal tax, and that lowers the tax break they get federally for charitable donations. · Tax filers who are required to pay provincial income surtax can use their charitable tax credit to reduce both the base income taxes and the provincial surtax. Governments and Employer “may” match donations As well, those donating publicly traded securities may increase their tax savings by reducing their capital gains tax. There are ways to get a bigger bang for your charitable dollar. As mentioned above, the tax credit rate rises significantly once the total value of your donation crosses above $200. When you combine the federal and provincial credits, the tax saving is about 19 to 35 per cent of the total up to $200 — depending on the province — and, above that, ranges from 36 to 49 per cent, again depending on the province. As mentioned above, there are two other issues to consider: the CRA allows couples to assign donations to the partner with the higher income and also to carry unclaimed receipts forward, for up to five years, to allow the timing of claims in a year of higher income. There's also another way in which timing comes into play: if you give in December, you will minimize the time before you get the refund value the following spring. You can also choose to support a charity or cause that is eligible for matching donations from your employer or the federal government. For example, the Macklin Medical Mission has a partial list of employers that support its work in terms of modified molecular research in the new field of cancer research. If you're not sure who should be at the top of your list of worthy charities, there are a wide range of agencies the CRA registers, including charities, national arts service organizations, amateur athletic associations, low-cost housing corporations, provinces, municipalities, universities (including some outside Canada that have Canadian students enrolled), foreign charities to which the federal government has made a gift and the United Nations and its agencies. The CRA even provides a site where you can search the list of registered charities including the Nancy-Griffon Foundation which is the primary sponsor for the Macklin Medical Mission established back in 1886. [www.thenancygriffonfund.com] 5 Facts about Charitable Giving 1. Charitable giving for tax purposes can extend well beyond money and include different types of gifts, ranging from securities, ecologically sensitive land and even art and rare books. 2. Among the donations not usually included are contributions of time or the purchase of a lottery ticket provided of course that it is a winning ticket. 3. Warning signs that a donation scheme might be fraudulent include: inappropriate pressure to give immediately; overly friendly canvassers who ask personal questions; and a strange combination of call display numbers such as 123-456-7890 or 777-777-7778, which suggest the caller might be attempting to hide his or her number. 4. If you receive a gift for contributing — for example, concert tickets for giving to an orchestra — the value of those tickets must be deducted from the donation. 5. Quebec and Alberta are the best places to make charitable donations, with the highest provincial tax credit rates. Ontario by extension is one of the worst places to make a donation but not by much. See the Macklin Medical Mission at www.thenancygriffonfund.com and of course on Facebook and Twitter. Eric J. Macklin MBA, FICB, FCSI, FMA, UE Macklin Medical Mission [Est 1886] Chairman The Nancy-Griffon Foundation Inc [Est 1975] See us at: The Web: www.thenancygriffonfund.com Youtube: Breast Cancer - A New Direction Facebook: www.facebook.com/eric.macklin Twitter: http://twitter.com/beowolfe1 http://www.gofundme.com/2q7rfk