Table of Contents
Gcmaf is a vitamin D-binding protein. It’s scientifically called Gc protein-derived macrophage activating factor. It’s a protein that supports the body immune system, and naturally discovered in the body. Gcmaf triggers macrophage cells, or the cells responsible for combating infection and disease. (1 )
The two most recent publications on gcmaf assistance reinterpreting the biological and medical results individually observed in vitro and in vivo by a number of researchers. The hypothesis that chondroitin sulfate might be responsible for the effects so far credited to gcmaf, solves al the disparities and contradictions that have identified this field of immunotherapy. Moreover, this hypothesis lays the structure for the development of non-proteinic macrophage triggering aspects that are not extracted from human blood, thus avoiding all the dangers connected with human blood-derived items. (2 ).
GcMAF Research study
A 1997 research study evaluated gcmaf on mice with cancer. It discovered that gcmaf improved their survival from 16 days to 32 days.
A few years later on, the researchers checked the treatment on people with breast, colorectal, and prostate cancers. They gave them shots of a small amount of gcmaf as soon as a week. After a few months, all of the clients were treated, according to the research studies. Four to 7 years later on, their cancers had not come back.
These results sound remarkable, however there were some huge issues with the studies. For something, they were very little– simply eight to 16 people each. Everybody in the studies had already been on standard cancer treatments like surgery, chemotherapy, or radiation. So it was tough to inform whether these treatments, or gcmaf, caused the cancers to diminish.
Also, physicians usually use imaging and lab tests to stage cancers– in other words, to see how huge the cancer is and whether it has actually spread. The researchers didn’t do this. Rather, they took blood tests to inspect nagalase levels, which isn’t a proven way to check for cancer or to see if it has gotten smaller.
Finally, the researchers never ever evaluated whether gcmaf in fact activated macrophages in the clients’ blood. So they couldn’t be sure that the treatment was working at all.
3 medical professionals from the Anticancer Fund, a nonprofit group that promotes cancer research, released a letter in 2014 that described a number of the concerns with the studies. They found a number of errors in the studies’ claims and said that its conclusions “make no sense.”.
Future of gcmaf
A few scientists are still examining gcmaf as a possible cancer treatment. Some early research studies suggest that it might be valuable for people with late-stage cancers. It’s hard to understand whether gcmaf works. The research studies that have been done so far looked at very small numbers of people. Some of them included only one person. Larger research studies are required to show that this treatment deals with cancer and that it’s safe.
Macrophages might still hold promise. Researchers are attempting to find out whether monoclonal antibodies or other drugs might assist macrophages kill cancer cells.
Up until we understand more, medical professionals adhere to other immunotherapies, like checkpoint inhibitors, that have more proof behind them. If you have concerns about gcmaf or any other cancer treatment you have actually read about online, your cancer medical professional is the very best person to answer them. (3 ).
Illness for GcMAF Therapy
GcMAF macrophage activation treatment works in the treatment of numerous illness, such as cancer, HIV HELP, Liver disease B virus (HBV), Hepatitis C infection (HCV), Herpes Simplex virus (HSV), Tuberculosis, Pneumonia infection, Epstein-Barr infection (EBV), cystitis/urinary system infection (UTI), Endometriosis, Selective iga shortage condition and influenza infection.
In healthy people the body immune system might have the ability to conquer lots of kinds of illness, however individuals with a jeopardized body immune system will benefit from gcmaf treatment.
In the great bulk of individuals there are no side-effects with our second generation GcMAF treatment, or side-effects are really small and incredibly uncommon. Low grade fever and eczema has been observed in about 1 out of 100 patients utilizing gcmaf but these were short-term results.
Treatment in our center has been by Intramuscular (IM), Subcutaneous (SC) and Intramural (IT) injection.
In Mix With Other Treatments gcmaf can be safely utilized with a wide array of other standard treatments and drugs to enhance their effect. We refer to this as integrative medication.
A mix with anti-cancer drugs and radiation treatment (radiotherapy) is possible. For maximum result and gain from gcmaf, administer a few days apart from chemotherapy. Radiation treatment does not have significant effects on GcMAF, so both can be utilized together at any time. In our scientific experience we have observed significant cancer killing effects from gcmaf integrated with palliative radiotherapy in patients who went through considerable prior chemotherapy treatment.
Studies reveal that gcmaf has anti-angiogenic activity in addition to growth killing activity through the activation of macrophages.
Gcmaf can be combined with Sonodynamic Therapy (SDT), Photodynamic Therapy (PDT) or both (Sonophotodynamic Treatment, SPDT), Maitake Extract, Coley Vaccine (Coley Fluid), high-dose IV Vitamin C, low dosage Naltrexone (LDN), Alpha-Lipoic Acid, hyperthermia therapy, immunotherapies and cancer vaccines (such as autologous cancer vaccine).
Gcmaf should be utilized in combination with at least 5,000 IU vitamin D3 daily. Blood levels of vitamin D are frequently low in numerous diseases such as cancer, HIV HELP, and so on. Typical vitamin D levels are required for gcmaf to work completely. Have your blood 25 hydroxy-vitamin D and calcium levels tested. If blood calcium levels end up being elevated, vitamin D3 dosages might require to be lowered to accomplish an ideal balance.
Combinations to Prevent GcMAF can be securely used with a wide range of drugs and other treatments. However, we suggest:.
Minimal use of steroids is preferable because of their immune suppressing result, nevertheless steroids might be securely utilized with gcmaf if necessary and prescribed by your doctor.
Radiation treatment is preferred over chemotherapy whenever possible.
Treatment is by intramuscular (IM) or subcutaneous (SC) injection of the gcmaf macrophage triggering factor, 1-2 times weekly (or as prescribed by the dealing with physician).
Treatment in our center has likewise been by intramural (IT) injection although IM and SC injections are by far the most common method of administration.
Great aseptic handling with ethanol is required when using the vials. (4 ).
How does GcMAF work?
Gcmaf is a glycoprotein that activates macrophages which in turn increases macrophage activity and transforms them into Natural Killer (NK) cells.
Gcmaf has actually been scientifically demonstrated to be largely devoid of any severe adverse effects. Just flu-like symptoms in few percentage of those who get the injection. (5 ).
To be more specific:
In a healthy individual macrophages in our bloodstream scour our bodies and kill malignancies; they get the message to go on the attack from Gc MAF, which is transformed from Gc Protein. However deadly cells like cancer send an enzyme called Nagalase that stops conversion of Gc protein to Gc MAF (Macrophage Activating Aspect); so the macrophages never get the message to go into action in this way cancer suppresses the body immune system, and cancer cells grow uncontrolled.
To reverse this we draw out Gc Protein from blood; customize it outside the body to become the missing out on GcMAF, and inject it when a week for 25 weeks for early cancers, 50 or more weeks for late phase cancers. (Encapsulated tumours need additional treatment.) HIV can need as little as 16 weeks.
In its function of body immune system regulator, gcmaf reverses other diseases that attack the body immune system like Osteoporosis, Aids, Hodgkins, Lupus, MS, Fibromyalgia, Parkinsons, numerous bacterial and viral infections and numerous types of Immune dysfunction.
Little pre-clinical trials to build the case are again occurring.
Those identified with any of these diseases or who are otherwise persuaded of the benefits of gcmaf for their health and who have done their own research study on it are welcomed to respond. We request for a copy of diagnostic details and update reports from a doctor during and after treatments, to assist construct the case that gcmaf is a remedy for numerous diseases, which will help to make it available to the public. Participants are totally free to stop at any time. (6 ).
A really relevant GcMAF history
Gcmaf initially sprang to internet notoriety in 2015, with an alternate health and conspiracy publication, Natural News, claiming the following.
A specific remedy named gcmaf (short for “Gc protein-derived macrophage triggering aspect,” which is a chemically modified form of a natural protein that supposedly stimulates the activity of a specific sort of leukocyte) “has the potential to be a universal treatment for cancer”.
It didn’t take long for gcmaf to attain messianic status worldwide of online hocus pocus and make-believe medical cures. Natural News continued in the exact same short article;
” [gcmaf] is also thought,” the web site reported, “to be capable of treating and reversing autism, HIV, liver/kidney illness and diabetes.” Rumor has it that gcmaf has the prospective to be a treatment for even more illness, such as herpes, also.”.
Despite the numerous research posts released in respectable medical journals (most now withdrawed) claiming to verify gcmaf as reliable in the treatment of cancers, gcmaf does not treat cancer, or for that matter, any other ailment. It was, and possibly still is, a drug for which there is no clear clinical proof to suggest efficacy for anything. Hints of guarantee have actually never ever equated into real results.
How it happened considered by some as the cure-all for cancer, is another tale completely, and one well worth following. In a 2017 expose by Snopes, ably assisted by the Anticancer Fund (ACF), gcmaf was lastly exposed. In the post, its creator and main supporter, Dr. Nobuto Yamamoto. Was shown to be guilty of falsifying clinical trials in a collective decades-long effort to sell the lie of gcmaf.
The severity and implications of Yamamoto’s fraud have prevalent implications for the medical neighborhood, its publications, and the processes it depends on to confirm new medicines. It has actually highlighted how a once-respected member of the medical neighborhood can go rogue, using the system’s “fail-safes” versus it. The gcmaf legend shouldn’t be forgotten. It functions as an irreversible reminder of unaddressed market loopholes, the majority of which stay in place.
The outcome of publishers not eliminating flawed research study leads to yet more papers, based upon the theories promoted in the original disproven research study. Here is a traditional example, where two of Yamamoto’s papers on gcmaf have been referenced by scientists, in a recent paper entitled “Prospective role of gcmaf in suppressing the intensity of COVID-19-induced immune reactions: Lesson learned from HIV”.
Two questions to the publications involved. Why have you declined to retract Yamamoto’s erroneous documents and where is the peer review procedure that would determine the research in the paper referenced above to be flawed? Allowing incorrect and problematic studies to continue endangers the general public.
You can discover the total Snopes Article here. Entitled, “How a Retired Researcher’s Doubtful ‘Institute’ Convinced the Internet That Cancer Was Treated”, it produces interesting reading and we suggest it as a case study in professionally committed pharmaceutical deception. Yamamoto had actually enjoyed a long and prominent profession till gcmaf, making the motivation for the scams that much harder to figure out, and professionals stay divided on his true motivation.
In November of 2009, Yamamoto effectively sold his patents for gcmaf and associated intellectual property to an Israeli biopharmaceutical business, Efranat Macrophage. The company, after at first accepting Yamamoto, slowly distanced itself from him, rebranding gcmaf as EFF-022 and reaching altering the drug’s name mid-trial.
While the medical neighborhood slowly turned their backs on gcmaf, the alternate health and conspiracy sections of the internet were far from done with their new darling, having seen the marketing and sales capacity for this new “wonder” remedy. (7 )
” Cancer cured for good?”– GcMAF and the miracle cure
As an organisation committed to beating cancer, we have a deep-rooted interest in any new research study advancements that might lead to brand-new, more efficient treatments for the illness.
So when we got an enquiry from a fan about a post entitled “Cancer cured for good” by Costs Sardi and Timothy Hubbell * we were intrigued. The short article speak about research by Nobuto Yamamoto in the US, taking a look at a protein called GcMAF (aka gcmaf). His released research studies appear to show that injections of very small amounts of GcMAF can “treat” individuals with breast, bowel and prostate cancer.
According to the post, “It works 100% of the time to remove cancer completely, and cancer does not recur even years later on.” Could this be the so-called ‘cure for cancer’ that we’ve been looking for all these years?
Unfortunately– as with numerous things in life– if it sounds too great to be true it most likely is. Significant concerns are now being raised about GcMAF (for instance, this investigation by the BBC) and the business that sell it, and it is not licensed in the UK to treat any disease.
Let’s explore a bit additional.
What’s the idea behind it?
Dr Yamamoto studies the body immune system– the highly complicated network of cells that assists to keep us healthy. The cells of the body immune system– leukocyte– battle bacterial and viral infections because they can identify and attack these ‘foreign’ intruders. But they’re not so proficient at dealing with cancer, because tumours grow from our own cells and have clever mechanisms to ‘cloak’ them from immune attack.
Macrophages (significance “big eaters” in Greek) are a crucial kind of leukocyte. They patrol the body, consuming foreign intruders and dead cells. They also assist to signal other immune cells to the presence of infections.
Macrophages can be stirred into action by a little sugar-coated protein (glycoprotein) called GcMAF, short for Gc Macrophage Activating Element, which is produced by the body. But it’s thought that the production of GcMAF is obstructed by an enzyme called Nagalase (alpha-N-acetylgalactosaminidase), produced by numerous cancers. This is among the mechanisms that helps tumours evade the immune system.
Yamamoto’s theory is that injecting cancer clients with GcMAF must activate their macrophages to eliminate the cancer. He tested it back in 1997 in a paper released in the journal Cancer Research study, showing that injecting GcMAF into mice transplanted with cancer cells could improve their survival from around 16 days to around 35.
However the treatment did not ‘cure’ the cancer, as the cancer cells continued to increase, eventually eliminating the animals.
Nevertheless, there are concerns about the science underpinning the concept that GcMAF can deal with cancer. For instance, other researchers have discovered no differences in the levels of GcMAF in between cancer patients and healthy individuals– and the levels they do find are far higher than the extremely small dosages proposed to work by Yamamoto. It’s difficult to see precisely how this finding fits with the idea of how the treatment is supposed to work, and it does not support the use of GcMAF as a treatment for cancer.
Fast-forward a few years, to the publication of three papers detailing the results of scientific trials of GcMAF performed by Yamamoto, evaluating the treatment on patients with breast, bowel and prostate cancer.
Note: The breast cancer paper has actually now been retracted, due to different worry about the work. Read more on the retractionwatch blog. The bowel cancer paper has actually likewise now been withdrawed. This letter details some of the concerns about the work.
The outcomes seem stunning– all the clients on the trials are ‘cured’ of cancer. Surely this is a remarkable development?
Put bluntly, no it isn’t. There are substantial scientific issues with the trials. For a start, all the research studies are very small, involving less than twenty clients in each– instead of the thousands needed to make the sort of claims discussed above.
Next, all the clients included had actually gotten standard treatment for their cancer, including surgical treatment, chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy. This is a rather unconventional design for a trial of this kind, due to the fact that it makes it really challenging to inform if any successes are because of the new drug, or the more standard treatments.
On top of this, the scientists didn’t in fact keep track of the development of tumours in the patients, and provide no medical information about them. Instead they choose to determine levels of Nagalase in the blood, instead of taking a look at any standard established markers for cancer.
For instance, in the case of the breast cancer patients, there is no detail about their “TNM” (tumour, node, transition) status. This is a basic procedure of how far a client’s cancer has spread, and is utilized to determine the possibility that it will return.
In addition, the scientists didn’t do any tests to reveal that injected GcMAF was actually activating macrophages in the clients’ blood, or even working in the way that they expect. There is no details about levels of cytokines– the proteins produced by immune cells when they are activated– or analysis of the clients’ immune cells.
Perhaps most significantly, there are no controls– unattended patients for contrast– and the research studies only followed the patients for a couple of years. We have no chance of telling whether their cancers were growing once again, or had actually been successfully dealt with, and whether this was due to GcMAF or the other treatment they had actually gotten.
Given that 80 per cent of all women with breast cancer make it through for a minimum of 5 years, an uncontrolled research study revealing that 16 females of unidentified TNM status endure for at least 4 years is no excellent shakes, clinically speaking.
Another little research study of 20 patients with a series of cancers, published in 2013, has comparable problems. It’s not a controlled trial, and the researchers only measure nagalase levels as an indication of whether the treatment is ‘working’, and offer very little difficult clinical information (such as scans or other recognised tests) about the clients’ real tumours. For example, in one worrying case, although the researchers revealed that an ovarian cancer patient’s nagalase levels had actually decreased, the levels of another marker– CA125, which is produced by ovarian cancer cells– had increased. Yet this is classified as an “improvement” in the paper, with no other supporting info. Overall, this research study is also a long way from being persuading evidence that the treatment works.
Another telling point is the type of journal in which the research study was released. If this research was really groundbreaking, and pointed the way to a remedy for cancer, then the research study would likely be found in top-tier ‘high-impact’ medical journals like The Lancet, The New England Journal of Medication or the Journal of the American Medical Association.
And lastly, virtually all the references in the papers are to other papers published by Yamamoto and his team. If GcMAF was certainly an appealing prospect for a successful cancer treatment, you ‘d expect a lot of other research study to reveal the same thing. Scientists are normally quick to identify promising, emerging fields of research study and follow suit.
The poor quality of clinical documents supporting gcmaf is discussed here on the Scholarly Open Gain access to blog site.
Is there hope?
Although this particular approach isn’t all it’s hyped approximately be, utilizing the power of immune system could be an extremely powerful method to treat cancer.
And lots of Cancer Research study UK-funded researchers are likewise operating in this field. For instance, Teacher Fran Balkwill and her group are working on ways to fool macrophages and other immune cells into attacking cancer cells.
In 2014, researchers in Israel started a small early-stage medical trial looking at the dose and security of gcmaf in cancer patients. (8 ).
Dr Yamamoto states gcmaf does not have adverse effects. Our experiences concur: gcmaf has shown no side effects of its own. That’s not unexpected– your body expects to have it.
But your rebuilt immune system might in some cases offer you minor side effects, however larger side effects with late stages of cancer, and occasionally severe impacts with autism, HIV and ME/CFS, as viruses fight back versus the reconstructed body immune system’s attack.
Individuals’s responses to a reconstructed body immune system are extremely various– from absolutely no, which is typical, to severe in a minority of cases.
Inside 2 hours gcmaf will start to affect your immune system, and (if your body immune system is at least partially active) a shot of 0.1 ml or more may trigger fatigue which generally lasts 3-4 hours. You may feel much better than normal for the very first 2-3 weeks as the immune system wakes up.
Gcmaf is a protein that your body need to have made by itself, and there is a tiny chance (under 0.1%) you may have an allergy, normally within the very first 2 hours. If in doubt start with a 0.05 ml dosage, then 0.1 after 12 hours. If you do have a reaction, it can be treated with anti-histamine tablets, which can normally be bought from a chemist without prescription (hay fever is an allergic reaction).
We have actually seen positive, but not yet negative autoimmune responses.
Other small adverse effects may consist of cytokine activity (with accompanying fatigue and minor weight loss, no such reports yet), histamine release (with possibly a headache) and the signs of a fever (3.5 hours of hot flushes) as the immune system goes to work.
The majority of never observe anything more than an improving sense of well being. (9 ).
Other important points
Activating macrophages with High Dosage GcMAF is a fundamental part of any treatment program which can be utilized alone or in combination with a lot of other treatments.
GcMAF works particularly well in synergy with targeted therapies which do not damage the immune system. Examples of targeted treatments include hormone therapies, monoclonal antibody drugs, small-molecule drugs, signal transduction inhibitors (HER2 inhibitors, BRAF inhibitors, EGFR inhibitors), angiogenesis inhibitors, immunotherapy drugs (such as drugs that target CTLA-4 protein).
2nd Generation GcMAF has the advantage of having no side effects so treatment should be continued as long as required while disease is present. This is a significant benefit over many conventional therapies which have cumulative toxicity that restricts their use.
GcMAF never stops working and will continue to activate macrophages while treatment is continued, either by GcMAF injections and/or oral administration of Colostrum GcMAF. (10 ).