Links to other
Maximize your browser window View Shopping Cart
Doctors don't have time to examine data from laboratory tests of cancer treatments; they only read the summaries. This page compares the summary statement of an NCI test of Cancell (Cantron or Protocel ) with the actual test data. The duplicity is appalling. This demonstrates the quality of information that doctors receive from cancer research organizations. This is the reason why you simply cannot take a doctor's word for it when he or she says, "This is the best medicine for your condition." They probably believe what they are saying, but their source is not telling the truth.
The short, two day NCI test is designed for fast working chemotherapy agents. Slow working Cancell reduced the mass of half of the 60 tumors tested by 80% or more in just two days. That is incredible performance, but in their summary NCI used words like "negative results" to describe this performance even though tumor weight data takes up 8 of the 14 columns on the NCI test data sheets.
Whenever a new cancer drug produced by a pharmaceutical company shrinks tumors even a little, the company makes press releases about a "great cancer break through." When tumors lose weight, they shrink.
You can find the following amazingly deceptive statement in the "Laboratory/Animal/Preclinical Studies" page of the new NCI web site www.cancer.gov (NCI is not a government agency, but it likes to make people believe they are so it seems like we have some control over them, we have none; the president decides how much money they get and there are no checks and balance):
"Based on these results and calculations of the maximum amount of Cancell/Entelev that would be available in the bloodstream of a patient after taking the recommended dose of a marketed brand, Cancell/Entelev may exhibit some inhibitory effect on the growth of some cancer cells, but it would not be expected to inhibit their growth completely or to kill them. It should also be noted that Cancell/Entelev was completely devoid of cancer cell killing activity in 37% of the cell lines tested-even at the highest concentration, which is roughly 275 times higher than the theoretical concentration that can be achieved in the blood of Cancell/Entelev consumers."
This statement is true, but it is based on the short two day results. These cells had lost a tremendous amount of weight in this short time (see the tumor weight loss table below) and would be dead in a few more days. See the sections below the third NCI statement for details about the above statement.
The next statement by NCI can be found in Question Five of the NCI Questions and Answers About Cancell/Entelev page (the test data for the animal study also mentioned in question five was not locatable):
Samples of Cancell/Entelev were also tested under NCI's In Vitro (laboratory) Anticancer Drug Discovery Program in 1990 and 1991. On the basis of negative results from these studies, NCI researchers concluded that no further study of Cancell/Entelev was warranted.
Both of the above NCI statements (in red) refer to the same test which is discussed in the sections below starting with Weight Loss Ignored?.
Another Fraudulent statement from the NCI Questions and Answers About Cancell/Entelev page, question three:
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has listed the components as inositol, nitric acid, sodium sulfite, potassium hydroxide, sulfuric acid, and catechol. The original manufacturer also identified crocinic acid as a component; however, information about the nature and origin of this chemical has not been provided, and it does not appear to be a known compound. An independent analysis of one formulation of Cancell/Entelev found 12 different compounds, none of which is known to be effective in treating any form of cancer.
How dumb does NCI think we are? Mixing even two compounds together and putting them into a person's body can have a completely different effect than either of the compounds when taken seperately. Ever eat a lot of cheese and plimbs? Ever mix different types of alcholic drinks?
Cancell does not directly kill cancer cells; it prevents cancer cells from processing nutrients and they starve. This is indicated by tumor weight loss. While the cancer cells are starving, they are still alive. Although, this starvation will kill the cancer cells, it takes much longer than a poison like chemo. The NCI test is run for a short period of time, two days, designed for fast acting chemo-like drugs.
It is the goal of Cancell to move the respiration process of cancer cells down past a certain point on the oxidation reduction ladder as explained in the "Pharmacology" section of the Cantron or Protocel web pages . Once this point is crossed, a cancer cell cannot process nutrients and it starts to starve. It does not matter how much further you try and push by increasing the concentration of Cancell, the rate of starvation does not increase. Also, the number of cells that undergo the desired reduction does not increase with an increase in Cancell concentration. Such a response would be caused by a poison like chemo not of a safe treatment like Cancell. So concentration is not an issue and if NCI knew anything about how Cancell worked, they would have known that.
It is unbelievable that the people testing Cancell did not question their low cancer cell kill ratios in light of the fact that tumor weight was being drastically reduced in every one of the 60 test tumors (see Table 2, three screens below). How could the test evaluators ignore such dramatic tumor weight reduction? Tumor weight data takes up most of the space on the NCI data sheets, eight of the 14 columns are used to measure tumor weight loss.
When a new cancer treatment comes out, I would imagine that every doctor's first question is "How does it work?" The method of Cancell's operation was never held secret. How could the testers be so uninterested in the pharmacology of Cancell that they did not know that Cancell causes tumor cells to digest themselves? How could they not know such a basic aspect of the treatment they were testing?
The data in Table 2 below was taken from three sets of test results developed by the National Cancer Institute (NCI). In these tests:
The following tables were produced from NCI test results for three compounds:
|Compound, NCI judgment||NSC Number||Number of Tumor Types That Showed
Mass Reductions of at least:
|Perillyl alcohol, inactive||641066-T/2||
Table 2 shows the results of treating 60 types of tumors with three different compounds.
The first column contains the type of name of the type of tumor being tested. The next three columns contain the percentage of change of the tumor mass compared to the tumor mass before the test period. Each of these three columns contains the results for each of the following compounds:
Red - mass reduction greater than 95%
Blue - mass reduction greater than 80%
|Tumor Type||Perillyl||Taxol||Cancell||..............||Tumor Type||Perillyl||Taxol||Cancell|
|Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer||U251||70||-85||-99|
|LXFL 529||NT||NT||-96||Ovarian Cancer|
|Small Cell Lung Cancer||IGROV1||96||2||-41|
Perillyl and Taxol were tested on two other cancer panels that Cancell was not tested against so these panels were not included in the table.
Below the exampletest sheet and its explanation, are links to high and low resolution graphicsof the test sheets for:
There are 14 columns on the NCI test sheets. From left to right:
Column 1 lists the tumor type tested.
Columns 4 to 7 define the concentrations of the compound under test. This helps determine correct dosage for follow-on testing.
Columns 8 to 11 contain the actual results expressed in percentage growth of the tumors. A reduction in mass is indicated by a negative number and indicates anti-cancer activity. There are four numbers for each tumor type meaning that four tumors of that type were tested at four different concentrations.
Columns 11 to 14 contain the actual results expressed in number of cells killed. The NCI summary of this parameter and my rebuttal can be found above in the "Fraudulent Test Summary Statements by NCI" section near the top of this paper.