The Metabolic Cancer Revolution with Dr. Thomas Seyfried, Georgi Dinkov
节目主题：癌症的代谢疗法
参与者：
核心讨论内容：
行动呼吁：
结论： 两位嘉宾都认为癌症本质上是线粒体代谢疾病，当前的基因中心模型是错误的，导致治疗失败和巨大社会成本。他们各自的研究从不同角度验证了代谢干预的有效性，并认为结合这些方法有巨大潜力。他们呼吁进行范式转变，克服体制障碍，推广基于代谢的、低毒性、低成本的癌症预防和治疗策略。
Edit:2025.04.05
00:00
Well, we're going to have a fascinating conversation today on our program. I'm David Gronowski, and we're doing something that we've always enjoyed throughout the years, whether we were on radio or podcast, which is exploring the metabolic approach to cancer. And I've enjoyed over the years interviewing my friend, Dr. Thomas Seyfried, who is joining us from Boston College. How are you doing, sir?
00:25
I'm doing very well, thank you. It's great to have you back. It's been a while. And also, our friend Georgie Dinkov, who we've learned through the years, has some fascinating ideas building on the work of the late, great biologist, Dr. Ray Peet. Georgie, how are you doing?
00:43
Not bad. Thanks for having me again. Yeah, it's great to have you both. So, you know, one of the reasons I wanted to have, I've been calling for a Manhattan Project for cancer and whether this, you know, how this coordinates, you know, it's like herding cats sometimes when you have great, you know, researchers. But in other words, we need to have people coming together and learning on the same path, which I think we're all starting to realize that
01:08
that the metabolic approach to dealing with cancer is the future. The question is what are the details, right? And so I thought today would be a real great opportunity to do that, to explore some of the details of what the metabolic approach to cancer might entail and, frankly, to see if maybe there are ways in which different paths can be used together to stack for enhanced outcomes.
01:33
success. So let's start with Dr. Seyfried. It's been a while since we've talked, but I remember when I would have you on, I was one of the only people on YouTube that would interview. And I know you were doing a lot of other interviews, but now, I mean, I see you regularly trending on Twitter and you're on everybody's show. So what happened? Well, thanks, David. What's happening is that people are coming to realize that
02:00
that the current system for managing and preventing cancer is broken, severely broken. And, you know, you can only fool people for so long. You have now, since President Nixon's war on cancer, we've had nothing except more and more cancer.
02:20
You know, the National Cancer Institute says cancer is a genetic disease. The pharmaceutical industry working with the NIH have developed all these different drugs based on the somatic mutation theory of cancer. And by and large, they've largely been a major failure. Yes, people do. Some people do benefit from
02:50
some of the new therapies and the toxic treatments for sure. We have millions of what we call cancer survivors in this country who have tolerated massive toxicity and survived, but pay a serious price on their physiology, having survived the toxic treatments.
03:11
And the new realm now is that immunotherapies are coming in. You hear about them, Opdivo, Keytruda, CAR-T immunotherapy, all of these things. All of these are based on an incorrect theory. And that's the thing that people need to know. What is the theory upon which you develop drugs to manage a particular disease? Theories in science are extremely important because they direct how we approach problems.
03:40
And if the theory is incorrect, problems are not resolved the way they should be. And we've been fumbling around with this cancer view of cancer as a genetic disease, you know, now for over 50 years. And we've got nowhere except more dead cancer patients. Right now, we have 1,700 people a day in this country dying from cancer.
04:04
That's 70 people per hour and it gets worse and worse every year. And we don't look at it like the number of people per total number of members of the population. Those are all smoke and mirror kind of things. You look at the number of dead bodies that are piling up. That's the way you know whether or not something's working.
04:22
When they developed the AIDS drugs, people were dying before the drugs. You bring the drugs in and death rate, the number of dead people dropped significantly. We're not seeing that in the cancer field, although we can see it. Once you realize it's a mitochondrial metabolic disease,
04:40
and not a genetic disease. The new theory is cancer is a mitochondrial metabolic theory. That is the theory that should allow us to move rapidly forward and drop these death rates and keep people alive a lot longer with a higher quality of life. And until the people realize, until the government and industry realizes that this is a mitochondrial metabolic disorder,
05:03
That's when we're going to see the death rates drop until that happens. I don't I think we're status quo. We're not going to see. We have to keep seeing the dead people pile up. So how long will it take?
05:16
for the cancer field to realize that we can easily manage I wouldn't say super easy but make it far less complicated than it is today with minimal toxicity far less toxicity this is what the mitochondrial metabolic theory will allow us to do so because we are publishing paper after paper after paper open access showing the hard scientific evidence
05:41
to show that cancer is a mitochondrial metabolic disease. Very similar to what Otto Warburg said 100 years ago. We have cleared up the mess and misunderstanding associated with his findings and cleared up the mess and misunderstanding of what the field thinks cancer is. And now it just takes time for people to read what we're writing
06:02
come to realize this and then make the big foundational paradigm shift, which is going to happen. And once it happens, you're going to see the death rate drop significantly.
06:12
That's fantastic. Georgie, you know, you you've talked about nutrition over the years with many podcasts with Ray Peet and folks like myself and others paying attention to your work. Dr. Mercola, what what got you interested in this matter of cancer and just your overall approach to getting into this topic yourself?
06:32
I just had a bout of really bad health around 2009, 2010 timeframe and had a very bad experience with the medical system where I was just being sent from one specialist to another and nobody knew what was going on. But eventually I realized I was just doing severely low carb diet and overexerting myself.
06:51
And then one day I was typing, you know, I was searching for the benefits of aspirin for metabolic conditions. And I found Dr. Pete's website. He had an article called Aspirin Brain Cancer. And after I read it, something clicked and I decided, you know, to start it.
07:06
following his work and expanding on it, but it has been a long path for me. I did a little bit of biochemistry as a side project back into the early 2000s. So I had a little bit of a background knowing how to read the scientific studies. And it remained a hobby for about a decade until I stumbled onto Dr. Pete's work.
07:26
And I just realized the entire medical system is broken. I mean, it's not just cancer. The approach to almost every chronic disease is, I would say, wrong. Sometimes probably deliberately so, simply because there's so much money invested into old theories
07:41
And there are multiple PhDs and MDs that are being banked on these theories continuing to produce drugs and money for the pharmaceutical and medical industry. So if I could expand on Dr. Seyfried's statement, not only cancer, but almost every disease that we can look at, chronic disease or even acute disease that is infectious in origin, we can find mitochondrial dysfunction there.
08:04
and things like the Warburg effect, it's not only unique to cancer. You see it in people with acute viral bacterial infections. You see it with people with meningitis, severe burn victims, people with diabetes. They will also overproduce lactate, people in heart failure, cardiovascular disease. So really mitochondrial dysfunction, there's probably no chronic disease for which you can go on PubMed and type
08:27
the name of the chronic disease followed by mitochondrial dysfunction, and you will find at least 50 papers claiming that that is the case. So really the goal, I mean, I don't want to say the goal, but my interest is exposing the fact that disruptions in oxidative metabolism is probably a fundamental cause, at least one, if not the cause of almost every chronic disease that we currently know. Mm-hmm.
08:53
Dr. Zafri, you know, have you found the success taking off? You know, what was there? Was there a knockout study or a turning point in your research where it started to really, wow, solidify that everything was coming into view about what was going on here with this disease? Yeah, well, there has been. But I'd like to say for Georgie, he's right.
09:22
Cancer definitely arises from mitochondrial dysfunction. And all of the major chronic diseases have a similar pathophysiology. I focus mainly on cancer because I consider it the big dog. It puts the fear of God into people. It really impacts people.
09:53
I think significantly more than diabetes, heart disease, you know, cardiovascular, this obesity, you know, if you, if you have diabetes, you don't feel like you're going to be dying. You're not going to die. You don't have this impending doom that you would have if you were diagnosed with cancer. But, but they all stem from a common problem, which is yes, it's a disruption of, of, of mitochondrial function. And,
10:24
And and we we put our we all put ourselves into this situation of chronic diseases. This is this is not how we as a species evolved. Our paleolithic insect chronic disease would be extremely rare in paleolithic times for five hundred thousand years ago.
10:48
where those folks were dying predominantly from infections and injuries. There was no antibiotics and there were no orthopedic or surgical procedures that could help them. They were very, very healthy. Their mitochondria were very, very healthy. Now today, our biology has not evolved nearly as fast as our technology has.
11:15
So we now produce massive amounts of foods and processes, lack of exercise, lack of sleep, poorly nutritious foods, obesity, chronic diseases up the yin-yang. And all of this is the result of a rapid advance in food science and technology. But our biology is still paleolithic. So, you know, to specifically answer your question,
11:41
I jumped into this whole field having worked in epilepsy for many, many years, knowing how ketogenic metabolic therapy could manage seizures, but also working in cancer at a purely biochemical basic science level, not thinking anything about, you know, how are these studies going to reduce death for cancer? It only became when the two fields, epilepsy and basic cancer research, overlapped that
12:07
When I started to do calorie restriction for cancer, like we did for epilepsy, and we found a tremendous drop in these cancer biomarkers, like inflammation and angiogenesis and all these things were dropping like crazy and tumors were shrinking.
12:22
And I was saying, what's going on with that? And it goes back to what Otto Warburg said many, many years ago. Cancer is a disorder of oxidative phosphorylation, the way our cells get energy through using oxygen. So I just started doing this research in my lab myself, and we published paper after paper. We were the first group to show that there was a direct linkage between
12:45
between how fast a tumor would grow and how high your blood sugar was. I mean, the higher the blood sugar, the faster the tumor grows because the tumor is dependent on glucose to generate energy through what we call cytosolic substrate level phosphorylation as an alternative to oxidative phosphorylation. So I started doing deeper and deeper dive
13:08
I have a PhD in genetics and biochemistry, and I know genetics, and I, like everyone else, was indoctrinated to think cancer was a genetic disease. I never really gave it much thought because all the textbooks and biochemistry books all said it was a genetic disease. And then when I started doing a deeper dive on the metabolism, I found out that Warburg was correct. He was the one who had this thing understood better.
13:31
And then why did they why did everybody drop Warburg's ideas about keeping your mitochondria healthy and this kind of stuff? And then I realized they ran off like lemmings over the cliff chasing jeans.
13:44
And the whole field became mired in this genome atlas, cancer genome projects and all this kind of stuff. And the pharmaceutical companies were invited into the labs at the NIH to facilitate drug development for cancer. And then I realized this is all nonsense because it's not a genetic disease in the first place.
14:04
So what are we spending diverting hundreds of billions of dollars into a failed project? It's not going to help. And the evidence is showing it's not going to help. So then when we started to do more and more research,
14:15
deep showing. Well, our big paper has just been accepted. It's going to come out very, very soon, which talks about the origin of how we get to where we are today using Warburg's ideas and now showing that cancer is a mitochondrial metabolic disease based on the mitochondrial metabolic theory, which will now displace the genetic theory or the somatic mutation theory. And once you overturn a particular theory that's guiding research,
14:45
and really focus on the correct theory, then you're going to start to see major shifts. It's called a paradigm shift in the field. And that all comes from
14:55
the interaction of my background knowledge, training and observation and direct research in the lab, seeing where my research in our labs paralleled what in the past does it parallel most closely, and most closely paralleled the work of Otto Warburg. But then I realized that
15:14
And we did experiments to show that Warburg himself was making errors in the way he quantified how energy is produced in cancer cells. So we've cleared up a lot of Warburg's misunderstanding, and we've cleared up a lot of misunderstanding in the way many scientists view cancer. Now it's just going to take time for the scientific community and the public to read carefully what
15:37
what we have written to show people where the mistakes were made, how we've clarified the misunderstanding and the misinformation. Now we can move forward in a more positive way. So the answer was it was overlapping many, many different aspects of my research.
15:53
and program were all merging together. And what we began to do is see where the real connections were and get rid of the red herrings and the things that people think are important when we realize the mutations in cancer are largely downstream effects and targeting them is never going to really be optimal in managing cancer. The cancer cells can't live without a fermentation metabolism.
16:18
which means they require fuels that can be fermented rather than respired. They're not respired because, as Gerge said, everybody, the oxidative phosphorylation system is defective. So they have to ferment. And when you start fermenting, you can replace one form of energy with another form of energy. So the main difference between cancer cells is
16:39
and normal cells is the way that the cancer cell gets energy. It gets energy from ancient pathways of fermentation rather than oxidative phosphorylation. And then you realize what are the fermentation fuels, the fuels driving this abnormal energy. And it turns out to be the sugar glucose and the amino acid glutamine, which we showed now is fermented. Everybody thought glutamine was respired. Now we have direct evidence that it's fermented. We did the experiments. We showed that the mitochondria itself
17:08
ferments. It's unbelievable. This is the organelle that everybody knew was the seat of oxidative phosphorylation. But there's also a pathway inside the mitochondria that ferments glutamine. Can you believe it? So this caused the field to think that, oh, mitochondria take in oxygen and they produce ATP, even in a cancer cell, making it look like the cancer cell is using normal respiration.
17:32
It turns out that the oxygen is taken into the cancer cell mitochondria used to produce reactive oxygen species, which are radicals that destroy the genome and cause the mutations. And they ferment glutamine, dumping out ATP, energy.
17:48
So this was people were seeing things. They just weren't interpreting it correctly. Now we know how to interpret it. They're fermenting. You shut off the glucose and glutamine transition the whole body to nutritional ketosis. Cancer cells can't burn fatty acids or ketone bodies. Checkmate. Now you know how to manage the whole disease, reduce toxicity, kill cancer cells and bring the people back to a reduce the chronic chronicity of the entire body.
18:15
Not only do the cancer cells start to die, but the normal cells start to get healthier and healthier. So a lot of the other comorbidities, chronic inflammation, all of these other chronic problems, hypertension, high blood pressure, diabetes, they all start disappearing along with the cancer.
18:35
So now, because you're bringing the body back into a paleolithic state of super health when mitochondria are now being rejuvenated and the cells that can't rejuvenate their mitochondria up and die because they're being starved to death by taking away their fermentable fuels. So this is going to be a remarkable thing for…
18:53
not only managing cancer, but for managing all of these other chronic diseases. And we developed the glucose ketone index calculator as a quantitative biomarker to let people know what state of health they're in.
19:07
Certain numbers, high numbers mean chronic diseases. You have all these chronic diseases. You lower your glucose, elevate your ketones. You bring the whole body back into a state of nutritional ketosis and normal mitochondria gets super healthy and the cancer cells start to die. So and you can then like you were saying, diabetes can go down because it's a mitochondrial disorder disorder.
19:29
hypertension, high blood pressure. All of these things are in one way related to an abnormal function of mitochondria. So the glucose ketone index will allow folks to have a quantitative biomarker to know where they are at any given time with respect to their overall physiological health.
19:47
Georgie, have you found that to be the case, that there's a fermentation basis for cancer? What have you found in your research and your rodent experiment? So yes, absolutely. Even as Otto Warburg found out about 100 years ago, cancer cells do something called aerobic glycolysis. So they basically ferment even if you give them a sufficient amount of oxygen.
20:09
And he thought that, you know, he never thought the genes were the issue, even though genomics wasn't as developed back then. He thought there was a dysfunction in the mitochondria, which could be repaired if the cell is put into more optimal environment. I don't think he got the chance to expand on what this more optimal environment means. But even to this day, the Warburg effect is a…
20:33
one of the hallmarks of cancer. And it's used to basically diagnose cancer by giving patients radioactive glucose. And then it's uptaken by, you know, all the tissues. But since the tumor has a much higher, you know,
20:47
much higher uptake of glucose than regularly respiring tissue on a PET scan, you can see the tumor uptake in the glucose and convert it into radioactive lactate. So yeah, the fermentation is definitely a hallmark of cancer, but also, as Dr. Seyfried said, almost every other chronic disease that we know of, Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, you know, a lot of the so-called mental health conditions
21:10
you can actually see abnormal ratio of the pyruvate to lactate into the blood. In other words, in favor of lactate, which means that even people with mental health conditions are experiencing some kind of a mitochondrial dysfunction, most likely, mostly into the brain, but probably in the rest of the body as well.
21:28
So my research really has been focused on trying to reduce the fermentation, shift the redox ratio of the cell, especially the mitochondrial ratio towards oxidation, especially things like the NAD plus to the NADH or the NADH.
21:43
ubiquinol to ubiquinol, or acetoacetate to hydroxybutyrate. And this can be done via a number of very simple methods utilizing cofactors that all cells require in order to properly convert the fuel into carbon dioxide and ATP in water.
22:01
So all my research really has focused on trying to shift the cell from fermentation towards more oxidative phosphorylation. There's always some basic fermentation going on. I don't think this can be completely turned off, but we know there are methods that can basically limit this process. And some of the newer drugs on the market that are targeting cancer are actually kind of trying to go into that direction. There are some new drugs that target the enzyme lactate dehydrogenase, trying to limit the amount of lactate that's being produced.
22:29
And they do have some effect, but it's not sufficient because they don't really target the mitochondrial dysfunction portion of the equation. They're simply trying to limit the Warburg effect. And it does have some benefit. And I think the reason it has benefit is because lactate is known to be an angiogenesis promoter. So when you generate lactate, the tumor basically gets to grow new blood vessels and grow.
22:50
So there will be some benefit to strictly limiting fermentation, but it's not enough. So we need to address the lack of oxidant phosphorylation into the tumor cell. And that's what my research has been focused on over the last couple of years. So you did some work with B vitamins and aspirin. Can you explain what you did there? Yes.
23:06
So, yeah, so we know that when cancer cells metabolize glucose, there is a block at the entry, kind of like the junction point between glycolysis and the Krebs cycle, and the Krebs cycle being part of the oxidophosphorylation apparatus. So there is an enzyme there, a protein that takes the output of glycolysis and shuttles into the Krebs cycle, and that enzyme is called pyruvate dehydrogenase.
23:29
So there was some very interesting research coming out of the University of Toronto, I believe, back in 2013, 14. And they showed that a chemical called dichloroacetate, which activates pervindic heterogenase, had some really remarkable effects on several solid tumor types, specifically brain cancer. I think liver cancer, lung cancer is what they tried. And they did case studies in humans.
23:50
Unfortunately, chloracetate is toxic, so it can only be used for a very long time, but it was a proof of culture. In other words, that kind of opening the gate that connects glycolysis to the Krebs cycle can be therapeutic in cancer.
24:02
So I started looking at, okay, let's take this enzyme pyruvate dehydrogenase. We know that it's downregulated in cancer. In other words, kind of like prevents the output of the fermentation process from going into the oxidative phosphorylation part. What can we do to activate pyruvate dehydrogenase? Well, it has a known cofactor, which is thiamine pyrophosphate, which is the active version of vitamin B1.
24:25
So I said, let's try a cancer study with simply vitamin B1. And there's some background to that. There's some studies with vitamin B1 in animal models, and there's some cancer studies where they injected thiamine directly into the tumor of a patient, and the tumor disappeared. So I said, okay, there's some rationale for trying that.
24:46
So I tried a xenograft model, which is a human tumor transplanted into an immunocompromised animal. And just using the vitamin B1 flattened the growth curve of the tumor compared to the animals that didn't get anything. So there was an effect there, but it wasn't sufficient.
25:01
And I said, okay, what else can be done? Well, one of the reasons the Perunic and Rogers doesn't work, aside from, you know, lacking thiamine, is that it also depends on the mitochondrial redox ratio personified by the ratio of NAD plus to NADH. That ratio is low in cancer. So in other words, cancer cells are in a state of a reduction, at least in their mitochondria.
25:26
So in theory, raising that ratio, in other words, shifting it in favor of NAD+, should have beneficial effects. And that has also been known to be another factor controlling the activity of pyruvate dehydrogenase. Lower ratio means lower activity of the enzyme. Higher ratio means higher activity of the enzyme. So it should be synergistic with thiamine, which is one of the cofactors for the enzyme as well. So the second study was just vitamin B1 and B3.
25:51
And then that basically stopped the tumor from growing. The curve was completely flat. The control animals died after, you know, 14, 15 days. Okay. But it didn't cure it. And if you continue the administration long enough, eventually the tumor started growing again. So I said, okay, good, but, you know, not enough. What else can be done?
26:11
And I found some studies showing that when pyruvate dehydrogenase is completely blocked, there is an alternative pathway into the Krebs cycle out of glycolysis. And that's another enzyme called pyruvate decarboxylase. And a cofactor for that one is the vitamin B7, also known as biotin.
26:28
There have been some very promising research with high-dose biotin recently showing that a really high pharmacological dose of about 300 milligrams daily, which is massive considering that the normal RDA requirements are about one milligram per day.
26:43
So 300 milligrams daily stopped the progression of primary progressive multiple sclerosis, which is a really kind of like very aggressive form of multiple sclerosis that doesn't really, is not amiable to any treatment. These people usually they will share with a couple of years after diagnosis. So I think they did about 30 patients
27:02
And the results were remarkable. And the opinion of the researchers who published the paper said, we discovered a normalization of a number of different biomarkers related to oxidative pulse correlation. The pyruvate to lactate ratio increased.
27:15
the NAD plus to the NADH ratio increased. The ratio of acetoacetate to hydroxybutyrate also increased and the production of carbon dioxide also increased. So I said, okay, well, sounds like biotin is a mitochondrial nutrient. Let's try it out and see what happens with the three vitamins together. So with the three vitamins together, with biotin being administered in those roughly equivalent to what the people with multiple sclerosis got, the tumor actually started declining. The tumor growth started declining. We were experiencing regression.
27:45
And then I continued to study for as long as it was ethically reasonable because they had these rules for how long the animals can be kept alive. So the tumor growth was about a regress to about half of what it was originally, but it didn't disappear.
27:58
And then I decided to add something else. Dr. Seifert, I'm sure you've seen, there's a tremendous amount of research on aspirin and cancer, mostly in regards to preventing cancer. But for some reason, these studies never address why aspirin actually has an effect on cancer or preventing cancer. Well, one thing is aspirin actually acidifies the cell, and we know that cancer cells are highly alkaline. When you acidify a defective cell, it usually commits apoptosis if it cannot recover.
28:25
So that's one potential anti-cancer mechanism of aspirin. Another one is that aspirin actually activates the entire oxidative phosphorylation apparatus. And in fact, in higher doses, acts as an uncoupler. So basically, it will increase the production of heat and it will raise your metabolic rate, depending on the dose that you're taking, by about 10 to 20%.
28:46
So aspirin really is a pro-metabolic nutrient. And basically, even though it activates glycolysis as well, it speeds it up. It also activates oxidative phosphorylation. So in addition, aspirin and most of the other hydroxy, mono or dihydroxy benzoic acids are actually active as carbonic anhydrase inhibitors. They inhibit the breakdown of carbon dioxide.
29:08
And the reason carbon dioxide is important in cancer is that most cancer cells, even though they have plenty of supply of oxygen, they overexpress a protein known as hypoxia-inducible factor 1-alpha, which is usually a biomarker of hypoxia. So even though cancer cells get oxygen, they don't properly utilize it.
29:27
And also, they don't uptake as much oxygen as normally respiring cells. In order for our cells to get properly oxygenated, hemoglobin needs to unload the oxygen that is carried into the cell. But the way this process works is it only works if the cell is producing a sufficient amount of carbon dioxide, which can displace the oxygen from hemoglobin, and this is known as the Bohr effect.
29:52
So if a cell is not producing sufficient amount of carbon dioxide, the hemoglobin is going to keep circulating and the cells that don't produce a sufficient amount of carbon dioxide will remain hypoxic even though oxygen is circulating in sufficient amounts.
30:04
So if you look at cancer cells, they have a very high ratio of lactate to carbon dioxide. And carbon dioxide and lactate are usually inversely correlated in the body. If you take somebody, a person, and do a blood test for carbon dioxide, if carbon dioxide is low and then you check the lactate, it will almost always be high. So they're inversely correlated.
30:25
So what I was trying to do here is basically stimulate the oxidative phosphorylation with aspirin and then increase the production of carbon dioxide, or at least, actually not only at least, but increase the production of carbon dioxide because it speeds up oxidative phosphorylation and also inhibits breakdown because aspirin is also a carbonic acid-rich inhibitor.
30:42
And then I added aspirin to the combination of the three vitamins. And then we had a full regression of a lethal human tumor known as human mental cell lymphoma. And there were three animals into the group, into the active group, and three in the control. The control group died within 14 days. That tumor is known to be, you know, it never experiences remission, no regression, even with treatment.
31:08
The three mice that are in the active group experienced complete tumor disappearance. Not only that, but I kept the mice alive for another month and then we stopped the treatment and the tumor did not come back. So I don't know if this is considered a cure. I mean, I know in human, in medicine, you have to have somebody who is cancer free for five years to declare them cured.
31:26
I don't know if that's true for mice, but we stopped the treatment, kept the mice alive for another two months, and the tumor did not come back. And then since then, I've been repeating this experiment with the B vitamins and aspirin for several different models. And I sent you some screenshots about a breast cancer, which I'm currently trying to get the same results on, and also using steroids for prostate cancer, but that's a different topic because it's not entirely metabolic. It's more hormonal in origin. That sounds very interesting. Okay.
31:58
My understanding of DCA, dichloroacetate, with the pyruvate dehydrogenase, the cancer cell will die through reactive oxygen species, ROS. And if you activate pyruvate dehydrogenase, you bring in more ROS in the presence of oxygen, and that will kill the cancer cell.
32:25
by that mechanism. If you have aspirin that would allow that to happen as well, we know that cancer cells have an extremely high resistance to ROSs.
32:41
mainly because of their activity through the pentose pathway, which is glucose driven and also through the glutathione. That's basically what what what you're protecting. So the carbons from glucose and the glutamate from glutamine together form glutathione and you have protection. The cancer cell does produce Ross. And you're right. It's on the precipice of dying. Right.
33:09
So when you would restrict glucose, and you're right, it's easier to take the lower glucose than it is to target LDH, lactic acid dehydrogenase.
33:22
Because if you lower glucose, then you shut down the glycolytic pathway heavy. If you could induce with aspirin or DCA or some other compound pulsing and open up to oxygen utilization, you will increase the ROS inside the mitochondria and kill glycolytics.
33:44
kill the tumor cell. And if you don't have the glutamate from the glutamine, you also reduce glutathione. So that even creates more of a stress for your approach, which would be the final removal of the tumor. So in our approach, by having a low glucose ketone index, you are lowering
34:06
glucose and elevating ketone bodies, which cannot be burned in cancer cells because their oxfos is deficient. The other thing you'll notice in all major cancers, they store fatty acids in the cytoplasm as lipid droplets.
34:24
And the reason for that, it's a protective mechanism, because if you can if you force those cancer cells to use the fatty acids and you open up your pyruvate dehydrogenase, they're going to blow up from the from the ROS created by the fatty acids. So the fatty acids are stored as lipid droplets as a protective mechanism.
34:45
So because if they try to burn them, they're going to they're going to elevate too much rust. So that's a biomarker. There's two biomarkers for cancer. One is lactic acid production and the other is cytoplasmic lipid droplets, both both of which are telling us that oxfos is insufficient.
35:03
If you can find ways, like that's why we use hyperbaric oxygen under low glucose elevated ketones, because now you dissolve oxygen in the liquid. The erythrocytes can carry the oxygen if you take oxygen into your body, but you can't. Hyperbaric oxygen dissolves the oxygen in the liquid itself. And if you lower the antioxidant capability of the tumor cell,
35:30
which is restricting the glucose and the glutamine, and you've used aspirin or any of the things that you're speaking of, you could actually create a much less favorable environment for these tumors. I think once we realize that this is a mitochondrial metabolic disorder,
35:50
Things like you're speaking about, Georgie, and others, you open the floodgates for these kinds of approaches that that that will now were previously unrecognized or unappreciated.
36:01
And now you can use all of these different combinations to kill these tumor cells in a way that's not going to harm the rest of the body. And that's why we developed the Press Pulse therapeutic strategy for managing cancer, because you can press certain metabolites like glucose. The body can transition to ketones when glucose is low. But if you want to target glutamine or do other types of approaches that…
36:27
you run the risk of harming normal cells, you have to pulse those strategies and not make them chronic because just for a short brief period of time when the tumor cell is now compromised, a pulsing of these approaches will facilitate the destruction of the tumor while not allowing normal cells to be harmed because you're only pulsing and not chronically stressing. So the press pulse can open up for many strategies like you speak about.
36:56
especially when the patient has the low glucose elevated ketones, you come in with the strategies that you're talking about, the tumor cells become super vulnerable, super vulnerable now. So I'm looking at a future where we can integrate many of these strategies and make them far more successful in the clinic. The problem is we're not doing that
37:18
We're diverting massive amounts of resources to hunting and targeting genes which are downstream epiphenomenon. These immunotherapies are based on the somatic mutation theory. They're not going to be optimal. Yet we're taking our valuable resources from our government and from taxpayers and from private foundations and putting them into approaches that are never going to be optimal because they're based on an incorrect theory. Once you realize this is a mitochondrial metabolic problem,
37:46
approaches like you speak of become integrative to many other approaches and can manage these cancers and other chronic diseases with minimal toxicity. So I'm looking forward to a very interesting future where we can begin to find the mechanisms and divert and now get to the real heart of the problem. So this is very exciting. I'll have to look into some of these things myself.
38:12
There is a new drug called Calciodragona Market, which is almost entirely metabolic in origin. I'm not sure if you've heard of it. It's kind of kept on the down low because I don't think FDA wants the cancer industry to go in that direction yet. It's called Apatone, and it's a combination of vitamin K3, also known as menadione, and it's a quinone, obviously, and also vitamin C.
38:34
So it's an instant combination and the proposed mechanism of action is that vitamin K will oxidize the ascorbic acid into dehydroascorbic acid. And because the molecule is very similar in structure to glucose, it gets preferentially uptaken by tumor cells. But it's a very powerful oxidant. It quickly depletes
38:53
glutathione, specifically the GSH, and then the tumor becomes highly vulnerable to all kinds of reactive oxygen species and quickly dies because it's made protection. The two of them are alkaline environment and a high level, high ratio of GSH, which is the reduced version to GSHG, which is the oxidized one.
39:10
So they really, I think it's entirely metabolic approach, but I think the unique portion here is that they found a molecule which is similar to glucose. It's preferentially uptaken by the tumor, and this way they're targeting most of the tumor cells and not the rest.
39:23
Yeah, well, this is this is the future of the clinical trials that should be done by the federal government. The cancer industry should be evaluating human clinical trials using combinations of these approaches. You know what? When we are clinical work, I'm not a clinician, but I have a lot of clinical clinicians that work with me.
39:44
When we bring down the glucose, elevate the ketones now, and we use these parasite medications as well. They block glycolysis and glutaminolysis, the two pathways. Now you make these tumor cells vulnerable to so many. We should be doing clinical trials on this. This is where you're going to get the outcome. This is where you're going to get survival with low toxicity. Why are we not doing this?
40:09
because the field thinks cancer is a genetic disease and we're wasting our valuable resources on an incorrect theory. So once you realize it's a mitochondrial metabolic problem, we can open the floodgates to all kinds of approaches and we can run clinical trials. And even if the tumor doesn't go away, like our glioblastoma guy, he lived 10 years on a metabolic therapy
40:36
only to die from a surgical, the third, he had an inoperable brain tumor that was operated on three times. When they told him he was gonna live nine months, his tumor was inoperable. But after metabolic therapy, he operated three times over 10 years and then passed away from a cerebral hemorrhage on the fourth surgical operation. But he never died from the tumor.
40:58
And he had 10 years. He was like our long, longest term survivor with glioblastoma using metabolic therapy, no radiation, no chemo, none of that stuff. So we're going to, at our Greek, uh, study that just came out this year, uh, just on ketogenic diet, uh, who, those who followed it, uh,
41:15
reducing glucose, elevating ketones, 66% of the patients survived three years or beyond, whereas those who didn't, only 8% who didn't do it. So clearly, we are on the right path. And I think we can exploit these metabolic problems with these cancer cells really effectively. And you said five years?
41:37
If we can keep glioblastoma patients alive for a minimum of five years, that's what I call a major. Whether they're cured or not, they can live with these diseases and survive so much longer with a higher quality of life. What's wrong with this? What's wrong with this picture?
41:54
Well, the only thing wrong is that I'm sure, as you well know, it's all about employment. And we'll be I mean, this approach would probably throw, I don't know, a couple of hundred thousand geneticists and and genetic oncologists on the street. They'll be they'll have nothing else to do. Well, they have to they have to adjust and adapt genetically.
42:11
It's just that simple, right? I mean, it's not going to, we don't want to use, we don't want to. And the other thing too is in my discussions, I don't want to throw out all parts of the current standards of care. They just have to be used
42:26
in a different way, in a different strategy. I mean, maybe if you can't, you know, like you said, maybe these residual tumors that aren't dying and they're still hanging on, you know, maybe they become vulnerable now to an immunotherapy because those that would survive your metabolic approach, they must have something in common. They must all share something to have been survivors of your metabolic approach. Therefore, they become vulnerable, perhaps, to a precision medicine.
42:55
something along those lines. But you would never do that as an upfront attack on the tumor. It might be the last thing that you do, maybe a little dose of radiation, little dose of an immunotherapy, maybe even a very low dose of a chemo,
43:09
only to kill off some residual guys that tolerated the massive attack on their metabolism. But all of this will have a place in the new design of how to manage cancer and chronic diseases, yes, absolutely. So the difference between diabetes and some of these other diseases where lactic acid and mitochondrial disturbance is present
43:35
In the cancer, there's a two-point issue. One is the chronic disruption of oxidative phosphorylation. The second is a protracted increase in substrate-level phosphorylation, which is energy without oxygen. And that can happen in the cytosol as well as in the mitochondria. So it's a two-step process. In some tissues, people may have the first part,
44:02
which is chronic disruption of oxidative phosphorylation with lactic acid production. But they may not get cancer because they cannot cause a protracted upregulation. And you have to realize the mitochondria controls the cell cycle
44:17
and through the cyclins and the calcium currents inside the mitochondria. So the mitochondria is ultimately responsible for the quiescent behavior of our cells, and when the cells need to divide, like in liver regeneration, it's driven by an oxidative phosphorylation system, not by a fermentation system.
44:35
So so we need to know how the mitochondria are able to turn on, turn off. But it's in a regulated way in cancer and some of these chronic diseases. You're compromising the ability of that organelle to do to do what it's supposed to do in regulating the the physiology and biochemistry within the cell. So so, yeah, I'm looking forward to that. And one of the things you mentioned about the brain neurodegeneration.
45:01
in Parkinson's disease. What we don't find are cancers of neurons. You get them from glial cells, but you rarely get cancers of neurons in the brain.
45:11
neurons are incapable of sustaining fermentation metabolism for very long, so they die. Like in Parkinson's disease, you get death of neurons in the substantia nigra. And we know Parkinson's is a mitochondrial problem, but when you produce ROS in the mitochondria of substantia nigra neurons, they die. They don't become cancerous, they just up and die, and then you have these neurodegenerative
45:35
degenerative problems, just like cardiac myocytes are incapable of sustaining, replacing oxidative phosphorylation with chronic fermentation. They die.
45:45
And that's why you rarely, if ever, get cancers in neurons or mature cardiomyocytes, where any other kinds of cells in our bodies that can make this protracted increase in substrate-level phosphorylation to replace oxidative phosphorylation, you run the risk of having dysregulated cell growth, which ultimately is cancer.
46:06
So once you get into that stage, now you have to use the techniques and the knowledge of our understanding of energy metabolism to kill them off without harming the rest of the body. And as far as prevention, the way to prevent chronic diseases, keep your mitochondria healthy.
46:24
It's very hard to get diabetes and all these different chronic diseases, cancer, if you're mitochondria healthy. Exercise, right? All these different approaches to keep glucose low. In other words, you're putting yourself back in paleolithic lifestyle where our paleolithic ancestors rarely had chronic diseases because they had to be active all the time. There was no highly processed carbohydrate foods in the environment.
46:51
So they were always in a state of nutritional ketosis in one form or another, not because they wanted to be. They had to be. There wasn't there wasn't an opportunity to change their their system. But now with the Neolithic period, developing grains and then from grains, highly processed carbohydrates, little exercise, a lot of poor sleep, all of these things. And you got to you got a chronic disease epidemic.
47:14
That can be managed once we realize how to manipulate mitochondrial energy metabolism. It's going to be very exciting. I applaud your work. I think it's going to be absolutely essential for better understanding of how we can manage these chronic diseases. Yeah, I'm curious to know what would happen if we combined the press pulse method with these B vitamins and aspirin.
47:39
Probably works synergistically, but I don't think anybody will fund such an approach. Well, you know, I don't care, but I just want to know what would happen mechanistically right now. But the funding issue is is really important. It's the revenue generation. People have to listen. We're an innovative species as well. There's going to be people out there that know how to make a buck on all this stuff.
47:59
I'm not that kind of a guy. I'm just trying to keep people alive longer than they would have if they didn't do what we're suggesting. But when you have paradigm shifts like this,
48:09
where we recognize that what we've been doing for so long doesn't work and that there is a clear strategy to do things that could work, there's always some way to figure out how to transition revenue. But it might not be easy. Just like yesterday, we heard, what is it, the liberation day. So we're going to have to put tariffs on everything with the hope that at some point in the future, we might benefit from that. And right now,
48:39
We have to determine that. Do you want to do you want to manage chronic diseases and make people healthier? And then, you know, and then possibly lose some revenue. But let the system adjust and adapt to figure out how we can replace revenue generation with these new ways to reduce, improve health and reduce chronic disease.
49:02
So that's part of the paradigm change. It's not just going to happen in the healthcare industry. It has to happen in the supportive industries that are involved in this. And that's beyond my pay grade. So…
49:15
We're only at the scientific level. So people have to think about that, you know, and that's that's up to the society as a whole to make that decision. There's the mechanism. But just from a from the science standpoint, I know you guys are just kind of meeting each other for the first time. But does the does the mechanisms involved in both approaches, do they seem to work harmoniously or would there be contradictions in these metabolic approaches that both of you are exploring? Do you see that?
49:41
I mean, they're both aimed at basically reducing the fermentation of the cancer cell. And depending on how damaged the cell is, there was a study with aspirin, which showed that when given to the animals that had breast tumors, it cured some of them, basically. And they looked at how the cure occurred. And in some of the animals, basically, the tumor cells committed apoptosis. And in the others, somehow the cells reverted back to normal metabolically.
50:10
And it looks like basically the cell that is too damaged, in other words, if mitochondrial apparatus is too far gone and dismantled, then basically increasing the stress of the cell will force you to commit apoptosis. The cells that are not as damaged, they may be able to revert back to normal metabolic phenotype.
50:28
And there's some evidence coming out of universities lately, specifically here in Georgetown University, showing that in some cases you could force a cancer cell to go back to a normal metabolic phenotype, which is what Dr. Seifert's research showed as well, by transplanting mitochondria. I think they were using some kind of chemicals to basically force the return of the voxel to phosphorylation. And even though the genome of the cell was damaged, the cell remained metabolically healthy after the treatment.
50:53
treatment. So I think there's a great potential for synergy here. I don't think there's contradiction. I agree. I think there's a lot of synergy that could happen here. And in our papers, we put a threshold here
51:03
uh, exactly what you're speaking about. There, there's a certain point at which the, uh, the damage is so irreparable that the, the only strategy is to kill those guys through oxidative stress. Uh, on the other hand, uh, if they're, if they haven't yet reached that particular, uh, stage, there's a chance through mitophagy, uh,
51:25
where you can recycle, get rid of the dysfunctional mitochondria. It's an autophagy mechanism where bits and pieces of the mitochondria can be put into the lysosomes and reconfigure. So there is a
51:41
a chance that we could recover normal oxidative phosphorylation or semi-normal oxidative phosphorylation in those mitochondria. But you're right. Once they reach a certain stage where they're ghost mitochondria, the structure of the organelle is so compromised and damaged, there's no hope to recover that. Then you can kill that with oxidative stress through some of the strategies that you and I have just spoken about.
52:07
But it is interesting, you know, one of the several things, information that overthrows the somatic mutation theory is that
52:19
At first, it was thought that mutations by themselves were responsible for dysregulated cell growth. Then it became clear that not all were bad. Some were described as passenger mutations, and then others were called driver mutations. And the driver mutations were the ones that were thought to be the drivers of dysregulated cell growth. So the field then started to focus more and more on these so-called drivers. Now, with deep genomic analysis, we're finding…
52:48
normal cells in our body with driver mutations that never become dysregulated in their growth. So our bodies are filled with cancer driver mutations and cells that never are dysregulated. Nobody knows what to say about that. It completely throws off. And then you take the nucleus of a tumor cell, a
53:08
a raging tumor cell and put it into a new cytoplasm with fresh mitochondria and you restore growth. The growth regulation is restored, clearly indicating that the mutations, whatever they happen to be in the nucleus, cannot be the drivers of the dysregulated growth.
53:23
So this this is the platform. And yet the whole this is the mutations as drivers of dysregulated growth is completely disrupted. This is no longer a credible theory to explain cancer. Cancer is a mitochondrial metabolic disorder. And that's the I mean, this is and this is the great tragedy.
53:43
The great tragedy is we're not helping people doing what we know we can do to keep them alive. We're allowing them to die based on an incorrect theory. Well, we're going to change that. Go ahead, George. Cancer used to be the third leading cause of death, then became the second, and now I think it's the leading cause of death in all developed countries. So clearly, whatever's been doing so far, it's not working, right? It's actually only getting worse.
54:06
And then basically, if you look at the, there was a study that came out out of Anderson Cancer Center from Texas. I think it was University of Texas. It was posted on Reddit.
54:17
about five years ago. I'm not sure if you saw that or the discussion about it. Of course, Reddit destroyed it, but the study really said for about a hundred years, we've thought that cancerous mutations come first, metabolic dysregulations are a downstream effect of that. And then they did this really interesting study with different cancer cell lines and they show actually first normal and showed that metabolic derangements precede
54:40
the cancerous mutations by about three to four cycles. In fact, you can diagnose, you can predict a cancer metabolically long before it's formed enough to be diagnosable on something like a PET scan or an ultrasound or even a CT scan.
54:55
uh so really i mean i'm surprised the study didn't get more publicity actually i'm not surprised it's really inconvenient truth but it proved it and basically said the for 100 years we've been pushing the wrong theory it's the exact opposite of actually what we've got yeah well the ross kelly kelly experiments did that back in the 1940s they were showing that that the metabolic abnormalities were far preceding any of the genomic uh uh disrupt at that time they weren't doing deep sequences on genes
55:20
but they could still look at the chromosomes and they could look at some other aspects of the genomic instability. And it happened from the SHOPE virus as well as butter yellow.
55:32
So butter yellow is a carcinogen and it was causing metabolic disturbances in liver cells prior to seeing hepatic carcinoma and same with the SHOPE virus. And we now know viruses disrupt oxidative phosphorylation. I went through all of the causes of cancer that we know about and every one of them.
55:51
in one way or another disrupts the efficiency of oxidative phosphorylation, leading to a coupled transition to substrate-level phosphorylation. So we looked at that. And even the germline mutate, we have a big paper that's going to be under review. All major germline cancer mutations all affect the function of the mitochondria.
56:17
So so you have penetrance in germline mutations and no cancer mutation germline that is like BRCA1, P53, the Li-Fraumeni, the Lynch syndrome, the retinoblastoma, all of these.
56:33
are not, none of them are 100% penetrant, meaning that the germline mutations are secondary causes. But in every case where there's a cancer linked to a germline mutation, the mutation disrupts oxidative phosphorylation. So clearly, clearly, even the germline are what we call provocative agents that can disrupt oxidative phosphorylation.
56:54
You can get it from a carcinogen, radiation, intermittent hypoxia, viral infections, germline risk factors. All of these impact on the structure and function of the mitochondria, leading to a transition to substrate level phosphorylation and a fermentation metabolism.
57:10
So so it becomes so clear once you understand what the real issue is with the nature. This is going to blow the doors off the entire field. Once they realize what the hell we're talking about, there's no way anybody logically can continue to do what we're what they're doing, knowing that that's not the correct theory and that's not the correct way to go about it. So it's going to be very interesting to see what happens.
57:33
I think that we'll see probably some class action lawsuits if they continue to push the genetic theory, because people will say, well, here is the metabolic one. It's the exact opposite of the genetic one. They can both be right. Right. So these people are producing results and you guys keep sticking with the old one. Yeah. Then this is medical malpractice or negligence. Absolutely. Absolutely. But when you have these kinds of paradigm changes, the
57:56
There's always a huge disturbance in the entire system. And I go back and look at the geocentric, heliocentric theory of the universe. You know, for 1,800 years, they thought the Earth was the center of the solar system and the sun goes around every day around the Earth. They have epicycles, deference, sequence, all this like balls of thread trying to figure out where all these planets. All Copernicus had to do was shift the position of the sun and the Earth. And now everything becomes explainable.
58:25
But it led to a scientific revolution in all kinds of other ways as well. And, of course, Gaia Dono Bruno, who was burned at the stake in Fiori Pasta in Rome, in the plaza in Rome, for supporting the Copernican theory. But he was also a heretic in the church as well. He wasn't burned. It just threw that on top. He was a Copernican guy. Let's just burn his ass up anyway. Yeah.
58:49
But you can see that the impact of these major paradigm shifts, the germ theory replacing the bad air theory, the theory of evolution by natural selection replacing the special creation, all of these have had major impacts in the field of science. And I think the replacement of the somatic mutation theory with the mitochondrial metabolic theory
59:16
will have just as much impactfulness on many aspects of our society, not only for the health of the human, but also in the industries that will be developed around that. So, and this is why we have to all wonder and be excited about what's going to happen in the future. It's going to happen. We cannot continue to do status quo. Status quo is finished.
59:46
People just got to get the hell out of the way because metabolic therapy is coming and it's going to come in many different facets. And there will be a revenue generations once people know how to do this and and rechange and reconfigure what they're doing. So it's a very exciting time.
01:00:00
I agree. Has anybody done the economic analysis of how much money will be gained and lost versus the current system, which is keeping people sick, or at least not curing them, right? And making a ton of money of managing their disease versus getting these people truly healthy and how much more productive they will be and how much more GDP they will create. I think the second option really outshines the first one. Yeah, the AI. I mean, I used a little AI the other day and it's, I mean, you know, generating, you know, if you could take out
01:00:28
cancer, diabetes, and these other big ones that we talked about with metabolic solutions. And it said, you know, three to six trillion dollars in wealth generated every year for the economy. So, I mean, huge. I mean, that dwarfs the couple hundred billion industry that currently is… Well, it's definitely an important point, I think. But you have to realize the transition cannot happen too quickly. It has to happen gradually as industries adapt to this
01:00:57
to this new realization. Because there's a term in cancer, we call it tumor lysis syndrome, where the therapy was so effective, it killed all the tumor cells at once, releasing cytokines into the bloodstream, killing the patient.
01:01:15
So it's better to degrade the tumor slowly, allowing the body to adapt to the slow degradation of the tumor, just as it would be to allow the society to adapt to the new transition of revenue generation. That's pretty sad when you have to refer to the cancer industry as a tumor to get the analogy right. It is. It is. But yeah, this is a kind of interesting concept, isn't it? Yeah.
01:01:44
The cancer gives you cancer, right? That's a meta conversation right there. I tell you, you know, I'm going to put you guys on the spot a little bit here because I have, you know, friends of the show that listen to the show who've been on this program just like you are right now. And that includes folks like Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, who's now the director of the NIH program.
01:02:05
And another gentleman who hasn't been confirmed yet, so I'm not going to put his name yet. But, you know, these are people who are going to be really involved with HHS and NIH. So, you know, what would you say to those folks, you know, if you wanted to get them to listen to your message, you know? Well, in our case, I think if you can drop the death rate for cancer,
01:02:30
And you show for the first time in over 50 years that you are now beginning to drop the body count.
01:02:37
If you drop the body count from 1700 people a day dying to, say, 15 or 1400 people a day dying over a period of a couple of years, you know you're on the right path. So so you know that this is what's going to work. And with perfection and like like we were speaking about synergies and things like this, the death rate goes down significantly year in and year out.
01:03:02
You know, any any administration linked to the drop in the death rate of cancer will be recognized as as a powerful aspect of the society. Because, as I said, there's nothing more disturbing and fearful currently today than cancer. It puts the fear of God in people. It's a doom. It changes your whole behavior. If you can drop that and make it less less traumatic to the to the person.
01:03:28
that's going to have a major positive impact on something that's really been really been done under a certain time frame. And the people in the administration at the Health and Human Services, whether it's RFK, whether it's Jay Bhattacharya, whether it's the president himself, you you you have to realize that this is an opportunity for the administration to look good.
01:03:51
and all the crap that we're hearing about of how bad things are looking, you have one thing that makes everybody look good, then that's something to get excited about. Yeah, I completely agree. I would urge the people in power to take a look at the fact that John Hopkins published a study, actually republished it several times, showing that iatrogenic cause of death is the third leading cause of death in the United States, actually most of the Western world.
01:04:16
So whatever we've been doing currently in terms of medicine is not working. Cancer is a big, you know, very big example. And I agree with Dr. Seyfried that it's, when you get the diagnosis of the big C, your whole life turns around. 75% of people diagnosed with cancer are subsequently diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder. So that adds to the burden, right? And I think RFK Jr. is, is,
01:04:41
is doing a very good job at looking at what is it in our environment that may be causing a lot of these things. If everything is metabolic, right? If everything is metabolic in origin, then maybe everything is environmental in origin too. No, okay, diet is a big factor, right? If we can treat cancer with a diet, then it can probably cause with a diet too, right?
01:05:00
So he's looking at things like seed oils, endocrine disruptors, you know, different things that are in the water supply. I think this is a very big thing because it will show, I think not only it will prove the health of people, but it also show conclusively that a lot of the chronic diseases are metabolic in origin if they can be modulated by diet, unless people believe that that causes mutations. But I don't think that, you know, that that's the case.
01:05:25
So my, my, I mean, my message will be take a hard look at what the current medical practice are doing in many of the so-called specific diseases and
01:05:33
because over-medicalization so far has done more harm than good. And then number two, focus on the environment if possible and see what are those things in the environment that are leading to this absolute explosion in chronic diseases. We're seeing cancer rates rise the highest, the rise most quickly in the youngest cohorts that we're currently looking at.
01:05:54
So colon cancer used to be a so-called old person disease. Now there are people in their 20s, 30s, and even children as young as 10 diagnosed with colon cancer. Something is definitely off. And I think it's a lot of it is environmental. So it needs to be looked at. No, I agree with you 100%. I'm seeing more and more people contact me in their late 20s and mid 30s, early 40s with all these colon cancers, breast cancer, all these kinds of cancers.
01:06:18
Clearly, this is not a genetic. This is an environmental issue. And one other thing that we should know about the atrium and killing all the people, we have another form of toxicity. Besides all of the toxic effects we're given to our members of our species with these terrible, terrible poisonous drugs and chemicals, radiation, we have financial toxicity.
01:06:42
We did a study on this one here at Boston College where we had people from the economics department in our department look at
01:06:51
People pay enormous amounts of money to have these drugs given to them. And they often die. Or if they survive, they can't afford the bills. The marriages fall apart. The families are destitute. They increase suicide. All kinds of terrible things. It's called financial toxicity. Sometimes the bills are passed on to the loved ones after the patient dies.
01:07:15
This is immoral. This is immoral on the part of our society caused by the high cost of drugs that are produced based on an incorrect theory. I mean, you can go up and down the ladder on this and find all this is such a horrific thing.
01:07:31
I don't know, Georgie, that bill for B vitamins and aspirin, you don't want to pass that on to a widow, do you? 72% of all bankruptcies in the United States are due to medical bills, just to put something in perspective. Yes, this is terrible. And the same thing with the, we found the parasite medications target the same pathways that cancer cells use. They use fermentation metabolism and the parasites use very similar metabolic pathways.
01:07:58
So you're talking about fenbendazole, I mean, 50 cents a tablet. And then as soon as the cancer industry found out that embendazole has an effect, they made it $300 a tablet. This is a Scorrelli. I call it Scorrelli and the drugs. They're like Martin Scorrelli just raised the courses. So this is immoral. These are immoral behaviors of members of our society did doing this kind of stuff to us.
01:08:21
Well, the friends that I know at HHS that are going to be in key decision-making ability are both familiar with the work that I use for my show a lot, Rene Girard and Mimetic Theory, which talks a lot about the power of groupthink to blind people mimetically towards bad, incorrect decisions.
01:08:41
decisions and so they know very well the social mechanisms that are retarding our ability to move forward. So they they're very well studied in this human and social sciences to pick up on the wood is going on here. They can they under they get it. I know these
01:08:58
gentlemen very well and so my point is there's no excuse folks it's going to have to get done if we don't know how much time window those gentlemen will be in power uh hopefully more than just four years but you know we got to assume that's about all we got to get something done and i want this manhattan project done so i'm going to ask you guys what you know dr safari you you mentioned that you know people need to just pay attention so what would it be you know the researchers are
01:09:23
What would be the thing, whether it's NIH or a private funded group or study, what needs to be done specifically that would get the industry to pay attention and to have to reckon with the truth that you are onto here?
01:09:41
Yeah, well, I think there's a strong educational mission because in medical schools, the young physicians are all told that cancer is a genetic disease and they're instructed about that. And then they go into the oncology fields. They're all trained to use these different toxic drugs and procedures.
01:09:59
I think the theory that has to be discussed that it's a mitochondrial metabolic disease, which will require retraining in the medical schools, because ultimately, whether you think it's a genetic disease or a mitochondrial metabolic disease, the implementation of the treatment has to be done by a knowledgeable physician, a physician that understands genetics.
01:10:18
how to use metabolic therapy to treat the patients for these diseases. They have to be retrained. They have to know this. So their training procedures have to work because we're going to have large clinical trials. People will go to their physician, the big hospitals, and they want to know who,
01:10:35
How are you going to do this for me? What's the plan for me to use metabolic therapy to treat my diabetes, cancer or high blood pressure or whatever it is? So the physicians, this has to be a global change in medical school education.
01:10:50
Because they are ultimately the people that are going to implement this to the masses. So that has to certainly has to happen. And, you know, as far as the industry having to retool and recognize, that's the that's another part of it. So it's at several, several different stages. And and you're right now, people say, well, where are the clinical trials? You guys are so right with the aspirins and this kind of stuff. Where are the clinical trials?
01:11:14
Well, well, we have to have strict people have to know how to do these procedures.
01:11:21
You can't run a big clinical trial by the patients not knowing what they're doing and why they're doing, and the caregivers not knowing how to do this. Then you run into a big mess of outcomes that are less optimal than they would have been had they been done by knowledgeable people. The patients now must burden a significant amount of the success on their shoulders because they are the ones.
01:11:49
that have to adhere to these metabolic procedures. They're the ones that need to know about this. Right now, poor patients go to the Dana-Farb, MD Anderson, Sloan-Kettering, Moffitt, Fred Hutch, whatever it is, and they just sit there and the physicians do whatever they need to do. They're bystanders in the treatment process. They're not participants. With metabolic therapy, you have to be a part. The patient themselves must be an active participant in
01:12:14
in their overall outcome. So again, it's a whole societal change. It needs to be at the medical educational level. The patients need to understand risk factors in their livelihood, what they can do to mitigate some of these. That's why we developed the Glucose Ketone Index.
01:12:35
Because it allows people in real time to know at what stage in their physiological health range are they in. So they now know what risk factors. So the technology accompanying the transformation also needs to be developed. Right now we have continuous glucose monitors, but we don't have continuous ketone monitors. And once we have that together in real time on your cell phone, you'll know exactly what state you're in.
01:13:02
And when you go and take metabolic therapies, your success of the synergistic approaches will help if the body is in already a state of metabolic homeostasis. This makes the outcome much more effective in time-wise as well as in success-wise. So all of this has to be incorporated into the new design, which I think the people want. This is the most interesting thing.
01:13:28
The people of the society want this. Yeah. OK. It's not like the industry is jamming it down your throat. The people want it. The industry is in the way. You got it. You got to get them out of the way. They either become part of the they either participate or get out of the way because this is what's coming.
01:13:45
And it is an emergency situation when you have children having colon cancer. I mean, you can't slow walk that truth. And not only that, one of the greatest tragedies is the number one killer of kids and cancer is brain cancer. These little kids get these terrible pediatric tumors and they're brutalized.
01:14:06
even if they survive, they have intellectual difficulties and they have recurrence. So we can stop that. That does not have to happen. We have a pediatric system that we're working on right now using metabolic therapy for managing pediatric brain cancer. I mean, this is going to be a game changer. It gets into the clinic. But the problem is they all think it's a genetic disease and they're giving these kids these toxic drugs and all kinds of crazy stuff. It's tragedy. It's tragedy. It just gets me all upset.
01:14:33
Are there any institutions or groups that are even on the cusp of being able to do a clinical trial that would be a good, powerful? We do case report studies. The latest report came out of Greece where we did 18 people, some of which on the metabolic therapy, some of which are not. And then we also said the worst thing you can do to a brain cancer patient is irradiate the brain. It frees up massive amounts of glucose and glutamine, contributing to the rapid recurrence of
01:15:02
The demise of the patients now you're telling a whole industry you shouldn't radiate for brains at least at least brain cancer That's not going over. Well, they don't want to hear that, you know, so you're you have that resistance on the part of their training So so there's a lot of things that need to be addressed So we do we do case reports small groups of people just to just to show proof of principle that
01:15:25
You know, I showed the data from our brain cancer study and not telling them, you know, look at look at the standard of care and the abysmal survival rate over all throughout the world for for gallblastoma treatment. And I put look at the data from this study. They go, oh, my God, this is unbelievable. What drug did this? It wasn't a drug. It was a metabolic therapy.
01:15:45
And if it were a drug, we'd be billionaires just by the outcome of what we saw from a metabolic approach. So clearly, it's going to it's going to be so better, so much better. We're at the very beginning of this whole process.
01:16:00
Yes, the aspirins, the vitamins, all this coming together is going to really make these these dreaded chronic diseases much more manageable. So I'm excited about the future. Frustrated about the interference by by by roadblocks and all these other. No, you can't do that. Can't do this. Can't always can't. You can't do this.
01:16:20
Let the science speak for itself. You cannot deny the hard facts of the science. You can only do that for so long. The Chinese have an ancient wisdom saying the people saying something cannot be done should not interfere with the ones already doing it. Hey, you know, I want to land the plane here, but Georgie, while we have you, tell us a little bit about what you found with the prostate cancer study you did.
01:16:42
So that's another paradigm shift, if I can call it that. Virology has been claiming that prostate cancer in males is caused by androgens, and specifically by one, actually the most potent androgen, known as dihydrotestosterone. However, if you look at the research, it becomes a lot murkier than that, and estrogen is obviously clearly also involved. There's always cortisol and a number of different… So it's a hormonal cancer, endocrine cancer. But to this day, the main treatment is that the main dogma is that
01:17:10
Prostate cancer in males is caused by high levels of androgens, specifically the hydrotestosterone. So the treatment is a form of chemical castration. And back in the day, it used to be physical castration as well. And to this day, it's also practiced. So really, it decimates the health of the patient. They become incontinent. They become impotent. They get erectile dysfunction.
01:17:30
Obviously the androgens are down the drain, so they gain massive amounts of weight, mostly in the form of fat. They have brain fog, basically their mood is destroyed. They have mental health issues. So after looking at all these studies, I decided to do something exactly opposite.
01:17:46
thinking that maybe this theory is just like the cancer theory that is exactly 180 degrees from what really is happening. So I did a study with again xenograft human tumor transplanted into mice and I used this treatment dihydrotestosterone plus a chemical known as an aromatase inhibitor which limits the production of estrogen. So in that group they got both treatments
01:18:09
basically we have a full cure, complete regression of the tumor and there's no recurrence after discontinuing the treatment. So, just one experiment will show number one that androgen, especially the ones that urology claims is the cause of prostate cancer, naturally cure it and in addition,
01:18:27
that estrogen is likely a cause because this treatment is 100% anti-estrogenic. We're administering an androgen, which cannot be aromatized. It cannot be converted to estrogen, plus an aromatase inhibitor. It's about as anti-estrogenic as it gets. And one of the current treatments for prostate cancer is giving male patients estrogen as part of their chemical castration regimen.
01:18:48
So there's an example of once again, in a specific cancer field that what the current theory says is actually, it looks like it's about 180 degrees from where the truth is. Yeah.
01:18:59
This is the value of knowing what the metabolic systems look like, where you start to see things that are really unbelievable because you're taking a totally different new approach and knowledge about this. So a lot of the – I agree that androgen deprivation therapy is brutal. I wrote a puff piece for Nature Urology on how that should be –
01:19:23
reduced or eliminated that we can there's a lot of other ways we can manage prostate cancer and as you know they were using the psa marker uh as a and all these my friends my brother everybody was getting their prostate gland cut out and then they realized oh psa is not a good marker for prostate cancer and all these were surgically mutilated right now you know i mean this is nuts
01:19:44
I mean, we got to reevaluate this whole thing. There was a page, a Wikipedia page about a hormone called estrone sulfate. I'm sure you're familiar with it. And years ago, it used to say that it's a good prognostic biomarker of both developing and dying from prostate cancer and also developing and dying from breast cancer. So clearly estrone is involved in these cancers. So I emailed the people who are the authors of the page asking like, you know, how did you, can you give me some of the studies for these claims because they weren't cited in the Wikipedia page.
01:20:13
About a month later, all of these claims about estrone sulfate disappeared. Right now, if you go to the Wikipedia page, all it says is that it's a major estrogen in the body with many beneficial effects. So all of the rest have been scrubbed. Yeah, wow. That's unbelievable. You're running up against big estrogen. I appreciate you guys coming on. I want to land the plane. How can people stay involved with your work or be a supporter of this paradigm continuing? I mean, I know my audience…
01:20:41
You guys, you know, have such a positive. This is good news. You know, people want to hear they're so tired of negative news. And it's nice to feel like there's an opportunity for positive breakthroughs to happen in the world. And you guys are in the middle of being a part of the biggest good news event in a long, long time. So tell people how they can get involved and how they can follow your work.
01:21:07
Well, in my case, my research is supported entirely from philanthropy and private foundations.
01:21:15
So that's how I can pretty much do with that. What the hell I want to do, knowing what we need to do. So my publications, if you look at the acknowledgement section, you'll say, who are all these people? Like what are these societies and people? Well, they're the they're the guys supporting the research. So we we get funds from Travis Christopherson's Foundation for Cancer Metabolic Therapies and through the University Boston College Foundation.
01:21:41
people can support the research that we get through. They just give money to the university and it gets filtered down into my research program if they designate that. So that keeps us going. So I haven't used NIH money at the very beginning when I had no clue what the hell cancer was all about.
01:21:59
uh… you know you just do basic research it was supported by any h thanks and i a t thankfully uh… but now it's all private foundations in philanthropy but we'd like to see the government get back on the right track and start funding the things that are that are related to what's eventually go to uh… be responsible for the health of people but right now it's if people want to support what i do uh… it would be travis christopherson's foundation or people have their own small cancer foundation some of these foundations
01:22:27
are transitioning their money away from some of these failed projects and putting it into projects that have great hope and potential of success. So we get more and more funding from that, and that keeps us going so we can continue the march forward in the right direction. My work is completely independent. I get no funding from anybody. I fund whatever I do just entirely myself.
01:22:52
So whatever I do, I publish on my blog, which is haidut.me. And it feeds into my Twitter account as well. So all I'm asking for is that if people try some of the things that I'm basically experimenting with animals and they find benefit, just speak up, okay? I'm not saying to convince others to use the same thing, but just say, hey, I tried a metabolic approach and I got these results.
01:23:19
We need a grassroots movement here to kind of convince industry that to, you know, to take a look at something else, because I think if we're simply waiting on them to change the paradigm, it's going to take decades. Like I said before, there are way too many PhDs and MD degrees that are currently kind of bet on the current approach to cancer. And these people don't, don't usually don't easily change their minds unless they hear from a large number of people who are paying their salaries. So that's right. And, and,
01:23:48
They can read about my stuff if you go on. We publish all of our papers open access. So everybody in the society who would have a computer and go on to Google, put the name in, you can get the clinical studies that we publish in peer-reviewed journals. So they can see that. Our big paper that will come out very soon, which redirects the entire cancer industry, that is a mitochondrial metabolic disease. And we have the hard science to support that.
01:24:17
If people read that and understand the concepts, they will come to know that this is clearly a mitochondrial metabolic disease. And the gene theory is no longer capable of addressing these issues. We eviscerate the somatic mutation theory in that same paper.
01:24:37
so people know what the direction of the future will be. And so they can read this and they can debate it. And I've debated scientists from top medical schools that are, and they just simply don't know. They're locked into one view and one view only. It's a silo think. And they never considered, Gurge, what you were speaking about. They never even think about these kinds of things. So this is gonna change. It's gonna change dramatically.
01:25:07
Well, I appreciate your time, both of you. It's been a great discussion, and I hope to see you guys collaborate in the future. That's my personal desire. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Rick Gesser. Hopefully, Gesser will go away. Yeah. Well, thanks, David. It was nice being here. Thank you. Take care.
01:25:38
♪♪♪
Edit:2025.04.05
癌症的代谢方法（David Gronowski主持，Thomas Seyfried和Georgie Dinkov）
主持人：David Gronowski 嘉宾：
主要内容总结：
核心信息：
癌症是线粒体代谢疾病，传统基因理论已失效。代谢疗法（如酮症饮食、B族维生素、阿司匹林）可有效管理癌症及其他慢性病，降低毒性并提升生活质量。需教育改革、患者参与和政府支持以推动范式转变。
联系方式：
Edit:2025.04.05
