MB,...
A little birdie gave me this series of old posts by you,...although not quite saying WF10 was a cure for Aids, you seemed to say it would defeat the virus for years, and claimed a rather amazing mode of action, and also claimed the virus may have nothing to do with the disease,.. which may have little resemblance to reality,...I suggest your understanding of AIDS may be deficient, and certainly not in line with the best minds in the business.
Even if WF10 moderates macrophages,...it may do lots of other things too, as it is a molecule cluster that could affect a great many systems in the body, and not necessarily in the best ways. We await the results with great eagerness,..and really wonder how anyway could know anything about the results of the latest phase 3 trials given that aids is a disease that ebbs and flows, over many years, and thus needs years to discover if a drug really has an effect or not.
There are many other molecules under examination currently that target various functions of macrophages as well as other white blood cells and immune cells directly without effect on any other cellular function. My guess is these drugs will win FDA approval long before WF10.
I do not agree with your assumption that the FDA and HC would pass a drug they did not know the mode of action to now. This was a procedure of the distant past. Now they will demand to know more.
My guess is the US knows how DMSO works, much more than is published now, and more akin to what I have published on this thread,...and the fact that Russians and the US armed forces are using it to enhance the skin absortive abilities of their mass emobilizing drugs in terrorist situations suggests that passing DMSO based drugs in the US may be a little more difficult than originally imagined,...it may be declared a restrictive substance,...I should point out that several people I know who have used DMSO for equine applications have been unable to source it easily for about a year, even from vets,....why?
http://www.stockhouse.com/bullboards/viewmessage.asp?no=5258600&tableid=2
SUBJECT: RE: AIDS Article: Part II Posted By: mbartlet
Post Time: 6/10/02 18:48
« Previous Message Next Message »
di7026,
Thanks for posting that article. I am actually quite familiar with that material. I have read extensively from the Perth Group's papers and they were very much the pioneers in the redox theory of AIDS.
I recall reading about one infectious disease specialist -- his name escapes me now -- but he did a very interesting experiment that seems to support their work. If these anti-actin auto anti-bodies are due to excess catabolic activity, then we should all, to some degree, have them in us.
So, he took 100 samples of blood that was known to be HIV positive and 100 samples of blood that was known to be HIV negative (including his own) and he tested then all again for antibodies to HIV. BUT when he tested them for his experiment, he did not dilute the specimens according to the lab instructions -- which required a dilution of about 400 fold. Interestingly all the specimens that had tested negative to HIV when the test was run according to the manufacturer (diluted 400 fold), were all positive if not diluted.
How could this be if the test was "specific" to HIV. Well clearly that can not be the case. So, obviously then, whatever turned the HIV test positive, must present in all of us (anti-actin auto-antibodies???).
For those who want to read more about the redox theory of AIDS, go to:
virusmyth.net
What does all of this mean -- if this theory is correct, it means that all of the anti-retrovirals have been quite ineffective or only mildly effective, but for the wrong reasons. It means that if you can rebalance the anabolic-catabolic processes that leads to the inflammatory state (as noted when there is excess catabolic processes)then perhaps you can fix the immune system by doing so.
It may mean (all IMHO of course) that WF10, a substance that rebalances the immune system, is the best shot these people will have.
Why? If there really is no virus causing the problem (or, as some have postulated, there is a virus but it has nothing to do with AIDS i.e., it is nothing more than a harmless passenger virus) then attacking "the virus that causes AIDS" to cure AIDS, is pretty much a losing proposition.
This is what has so compelled me about WF10. If the WF10, P3 data are positive, then WF10 may be the first drug that has truly been targeted correctly, to get at the heart of the AIDS problem.
Think about that.
Best to all.
MB
http://www.stockhouse.com/bullboards/viewmessage.asp?no=4559923&tableid=2
SUBJECT: RE: WF10 question Posted By: mbartlet
Post Time: 1/2/02 08:05
« Previous Message Next Message »
alessard,
is a series of 5 treatments.
It depends on what it is being used for, but for AIDS I anticipate it will be 4-5 cycles, each cyle comprising 5 doses (infusions) over a five day periond (one infusion/day). There are rest periods between cycles (I can not remember the exact number of rest days, but it is in the protocol). So it takes a while to get a complete treatent done, but once done, I believe one could go for several years (my guess would be a minimum of 2) without needing a "tune-up".
So there is a little inconvenience intially, but once that is done, you will likely go for some time without needing additional tx.
MB
Just a couple of years late!
http://www.stockhouse.com/bullboards/viewmessage.asp?no=4553823&tableid=2
SUBJECT: RE: phase III of WF10 Posted By: mbartlet
Post Time: 12/31/01 09:07
« Previous Message Next Message »
Padco,
I have never seen 'September' quoted as to the time lines for WF10 analysis -- IMO that is bunk.
The reason it is taking longer is Oxo needed a few extra $ to complete the data analysis of the trial. That has been rectified and we should see some numbers in the next couple of months -- I'd hope March at the VERY latest.
MB |
