Scorpion venom & survival time

[Guest guest]

Hi Tom,

 

> The drug's developer, Cambridge, Mass.-based TransMolecular Inc.,

> reported in 2004 that a study involving 18 patients, the drug treatment

> was associated with an increase in survival time from a median of 4.6

> to 6.3 months

 

Tom, does this mean that the Tx prolonged survival time by only 1.7

months (6.3 minus 4.6) months?

 

Best regards,

 

[Guest guest]

, " "

< wrote:

>

> Hi Tom,

>

> > The drug's developer, Cambridge, Mass.-based TransMolecular Inc.,

> > reported in 2004 that a study involving 18 patients, the drug

treatment

> > was associated with an increase in survival time from a median of 4.6

> > to 6.3 months

>

> Tom, does this mean that the Tx prolonged survival time by only 1.7

> months (6.3 minus 4.6) months?

>

That is what it says, indeed. That might still be significant in

statistical terms, although I agree it does not look like that much.

However, let us not forget that 6.3 is only the median. Some people

may have lived one or two more years, which is a lot for some cancer

patients.

Another remark would be that the scorpion venom used in this study was

radio-active. I have no idea why, but perhaps to be able to patent it?

The study comes from a drug developing company.

In a way it is a recognition for traditional medicine, in another way

it is not: they altered it.

 

Regards,

 

Tom.

[Guest guest]

p.s. dr. phil, re: radioactivity, i bet this was just a tracer.

 

[tom.verhaeghe] wrote:

, " "

< wrote:

>

> Hi Tom,

>

> > The drug's developer, Cambridge, Mass.-based TransMolecular Inc.,

> > reported in 2004 that a study involving 18 patients, the drug

treatment

> > was associated with an increase in survival time from a median of 4.6

> > to 6.3 months

>

> Tom, does this mean that the Tx prolonged survival time by only 1.7

> months (6.3 minus 4.6) months?

>

That is what it says, indeed. That might still be significant in

statistical terms, although I agree it does not look like that much.

However, let us not forget that 6.3 is only the median. Some people

may have lived one or two more years, which is a lot for some cancer

patients.

Another remark would be that the scorpion venom used in this study was

radio-active. I have no idea why, but perhaps to be able to patent it?

The study comes from a drug developing company.

In a way it is a recognition for traditional medicine, in another way

it is not: they altered it.

 

Regards,

 

Tom.

[Guest guest]

, " Tom Verhaeghe "

<tom.verhaeghe wrote:

> Another remark would be that the scorpion venom used in this study

was

> radio-active. I have no idea why, but perhaps to be able to patent

it?

> The study comes from a drug developing company.

> In a way it is a recognition for traditional medicine, in another way

> it is not: they altered it.

 

Tom, a radioactive substance was attached to the protein from the

scorpion venom. The venom was never intended to attack the cancer,

the venom's special forte was that it can direct active drugs to the

cancer. The radioactive substance is carried by the venom to the

target site, but it is the radioactive substance that is the active

component in the therapy. The venom allows delivery of the

radioactive substance to the needed area, but it is not a stand-alone

treatment because it has no ability to combat the cancer, it only

targets it.

 

In many ways, this is actually very supportive of Chinese medicinal

theory. Scorpion is used for stubborn cases, and many insects and

snakes are said to have a powerful ability to " track down wind. "

Their specialty is reaching hard-to-access diseases, which is exactly

what the venom protein was used in this study to do. Scorpion has no

traditional theory that would suggest that it is a cancer-fighting

agent (except arguably using toxin to attack toxin), but traditional

theory strongly supports its use as a agent that can help to target

difficult and elusive diseases. In this study, they are essentially

using a formula with the radioactive substance as the chief herb and

the venom protein as the courier. In theory, it is not unlike using

qing hao bie jia tang, where bie jia's heavy sinking nature allows

qing hao to address deep-lying evil that it cannot reach effectively

on its own.

 

While the research does indeed seek to create a new patented

combination to generate profit, it is worth pointing out that if the

pharma companies did not have this economic incentive, the research

would never have been done. While I am hardly defending the profit-

driven aim of medical research, I am nonetheless grateful to have

access to the results of the studies. Studies would never have been

carried out by a scorpion distribution company, because as soon as

they put the money into the study and got good press for scorpions, a

bigger company would come in with more money, buy out the scorpion

supply, and push the little company that published the scorpion

research out of the now-lucrative scorpion market that they

pioneered. And in this example, there would have been no positive

results if they couldn't splice a cancer-killing radioactive substance

with the venom protein in the first place.

 

Eric

[Guest guest]

, " Eric Brand "

<smilinglotus wrote:

 

> Tom, a radioactive substance was attached to the protein from the

> scorpion venom. The venom was never intended to attack the cancer,

> the venom's special forte was that it can direct active drugs to the

> cancer. The radioactive substance is carried by the venom to the

> target site, but it is the radioactive substance that is the active

> component in the therapy. The venom allows delivery of the

> radioactive substance to the needed area, but it is not a stand-alone

> treatment because it has no ability to combat the cancer, it only

> targets it.

 

Thanks for explaining, Eric. I thought that quan xie was somehow used

as an anti-tumour agent in this study, but that doesn't seem to be the

case. I just checked pubmed and found that there is a lot of research

on scorpion venom toxins. However, I could find little research that

mentioned its therapeutic use.

I agree with what you wrote on research in general, Eric.

 

Tom.

[Guest guest]

, " Tom Verhaeghe "

<tom.verhaeghe wrote:

> Thanks for explaining, Eric. I thought that quan xie was somehow used

> as an anti-tumour agent in this study, but that doesn't seem to be the

> case. I just checked pubmed and found that there is a lot of research

> on scorpion venom toxins. However, I could find little research that

> mentioned its therapeutic use.

> I agree with what you wrote on research in general, Eric.

 

I noticed that the standard textbook uses of quan xie to attack toxin

and dissipate binds are largely confined to external applications.

However, it is interesting to note that at the end of the monograph in

most Chinese texts, they mention that quan xie may be used to treat

stubborn cases of headache. For this, it is taken alone as a powder

or may be combined with tianma, wugong, chuanxiong, and baijiangcan.

This miscellaneous indication (separated from the rest of the

monograph's style of linked actions and indications) suggests that

this is just a known empirical effect of quan xie. It seems to be the

most relevant thing that I can find in a TCM monograph that would

support quan xie's use in this study, an ability to reach the head and

resolve stubborn cases (and nothing makes for a more stubborn headache

than brain cancer!).

 

Eric