New Drug Prevents Radiation Damage
Radiation damage is one of the most frightening aspects of catastrophic nuclear events but, more often, cancer patients suffer the gut-wrenching side effects of the radiation that is administered in an effort to kill the tumor and save the life. In what one scientist describes as his “eureka moment,” a new drug was envisioned that has turned into a very viable potential weapon in the fights against both cancer and nuclear emergency.
Andrei Gudkov, affiliated with the Roswell Park Cancer Institute, has developed CBLB502, the code name for his new drug that protects healthy cells from the damage caused by radiation even while killing off the cancerous cells. The eureka moment came when he got the idea to put one of cancer’s own sneaky little tricks to work against it.
The trick is apoptosis, or cellular suicide. When healthy cells are exposed to radiation, even at doses that produce damage than can be repaired, they instead do what seems to be suicide. The cells in the bone marrow and gastrointestinal (GI) tract are particularly vulnerable.
Cancer cells, however, use various means of blocking apoptosis, enabling cancerous tumors to grow. One way they block cellular suicide is by activating a signaling pathway known as NFKB, or nuclear factor-KappaB.
By imitating this tumor trick, Gudkov and his team of colleagues were able to block apoptosis in healthy tissue by introducing flagellin, a protein made from bacteria in the GI tract, to activate the NFKB pathway.
They then administered their flagellin-based experimental drug on rhesus monkeys and mice before exposing the animals to full-body, lethal doses of radiation, similar to what might be received during a widespread nuclear emergency. The drug was administered 15 minutes to one hour before radiation exposure.
The remarkable result of this experimental trickery was protection of the animals’ bone marrow and GI tracts from destruction typically caused by radiation, and with no no observable side effects. What is even more exciting is that the cancerous tumors were killed, as desired, by the radiation treatment.
When mice were given the flagellin-based drug an hour after receiving rather high doses of radiation, their survival rate improved although the tissue protection wasn’t as dramatic as when it is administered beforehand.
Gudkov has founded a company, Cleveland Biolabs Inc., with the goal of bringing the drug to market. He intends it to be used in both cancer radiation therapies and for biodefense means. The US Department of Defense is one of several government agencies providing funds for the research.
Loading ...
I wonder what the risk of cancer due to the radiation itself is if cells aren’t dying like they normally would. I think one of the reasons radiation damage triggers apoptosis is that there is a risk of mutation otherwise. It seems like radiation-induced apoptosis may be a way of sacrificing the cell to prevent it from becoming cancerous itself. Prevent apoptosis, and the risk of generating new cancerous cells from the radiation may increase.
Wow, we are one step closer to hyronalin. Indeed, our next discovery will be lectrazine. Live long and prosper.
You take it 15 minutes to one hour before exposure, but what is the duration of time that it is effective after administration?
cs30109 raises a very good point. I hope that the concern of cellular mutation of healthy cells from radiation is specifically addressed in future studies.
” The injection not only protected the mice’s cells but also toughened them against the effects of free radicals (molecules that can damage DNA or genetic material inside them) as well as beefed up the animal’s immune systems. Mice without the injection died after the radiation treatments. “Never before has a single agent been capable of doing all three things together,” Gudkov says. “
They’re starting to take all the fun out of a nuclear war. I knew we should gone toe-to-toe with the ruskies back in 1961. Does this mean I can throw away my sunscreen?
cs30109 does raise a valid point, but it is moot if the organism *dies* due to the radiation exposure.
Personally, if exposed to a full-body lethal radiation dose I would much rather survive with an increased future chance of cancer than die right away. And, given that flagellin appears to not provide similar protection benefits to the cancerous cells, then if you *do* get cancer you’re in a much better position to have it cured by later radiation+flagellin therapy.
Seems like a win all around. ‘course, it probably causes impotence or raging BO or some other annoying side effect…
[...] MedHeadlines» Cancer Drugs Medical Research Prevention » New Drug Prevents Radiation Damage Radiation damage is one of the most frightening aspects of catastrophic nuclear events but, more often, cancer patients suffer the gut-wrenching side effects of the radiation that is administered in an effort to kill the tumor and save the life. In what one scientist describes as his “eureka moment,” a new drug was envisioned that has turned into a very viable potential weapon in the fights against both cancer and nuclear emergency. [...]
>>I wonder what the risk of cancer due to the radiation itself is if cells aren’t dying like they normally would.
Cancer from radiation is certainly a risk, but it is far lower than the risk for the patient’s current cancer to go unmitigated. It seems to be best to get full treatment, including radiation therapy, chemo, etc, all at once.
I wonder if this drug regimen would protect astronauts against cosmic rays? Its all just ionizing radiation. Mars mission planners are really worried about the cumulative effects of cosmic rays and solar radiation on astronauts on a 2 year round trip and physics based solutions like EM or plasma based shields aren’t practical. If the drug has manageable side effects it might be the solution to that particular problem. Now if we could just perfect the propulsion and power and life support and……….
One little flaw with this…
While this would be extremely useful in the fight against cancer and tumors, I just don’t see how it would help in the event of a nuclear disaster. I mean, you’re not going to know an hour ahead of a plant meltdown, only when it’s happening. Additionally as mentioned, there are other types of radiation out there as well, some not so drastic, such as the natural radiation you get by standing in the sun for a full day .
@ ReVeLaTeD
Yes, but you will likely know before the radiation gets to you. Anyone directly in a nuclear blast would be dead. Surrounding towns, cities, etc., however, may have a good delay before the radiation reaches them. This could significantly increase the survival rate in a nuclear disaster.
The potential for protection against nuclear warfare would most likely be from radiation given off by radioactive fallout after the initial blast. Although, in the heyday of the Cold War, Dr. Gudkov’s company could have made mad money as a measure to be used as soon as the air raid sirens started blaring. WOLVERINES!!!!
Am I the only one disturbed by what they are doing to these primates? Sick.
Its sad i agree, but id rather they die than my family or anyone else’s family in the future
If I were the tobacco companies, I fund the heck out of this and then claim that lung cancer is no longer a death sentence. Radiation treatments on your lunch break! Smoke ‘em if you got ‘em.
A tumor is a symptom of cancer-causing conditions. The tumor is not the problem. What CAUSED the tumor is the problem. Think about that. Your body does not suddenly just want to kill you all of a sudden. It is trying to tell you something. If you live next to a toxic waste dump, and you get cancer, then get the tumor removed, and then move back next to the toxic waste dump, are you safe because the tumor isn’t there? NO!
That’s why cancer survival rates remain virtually unchanged over the last 30 years (from conventional cut/poison/burn treatments). Radiation, chemo and even surgery are all 1950’s bullsheet treatments. They all consider the tumor to be the problem. A tumor left unchecked will eventually kill a person. But if you remove a tumor, or shrink it with radiation, or poison it with chemo, and do nothing to change the systematic imbalance that caused the tumor in the first place, you’re not very likely to survive (especially since chemo destroys heart, lungs, liver, kidneys, etc. as radiation destroys heart lungs, liver, kidneys, etc.) The abysmal 3-5% 5-year survival rates from chemo/radiation/surgery show this to be true.
Natural cancer treatments try to rectify the conditions that cause a tumor, and thus are much more successful (though the MSM or the FDA who both are puppets to Big Pharma would outright lie to you just to protect the profits of the oh-so-evil cancer “sick-care” industry.
Chemo and radiation fall somewhere between committing suicide and torture. I pray for everybody who has cancer. Hopefully you’ll consider that maybe God has given you everything you need to be healthy on this Earth, and that these man-made, decades-old money-driven treatments are undoubtedly doing more harm than good.
Let’s see… they find a drug which makes the entire body behave as if it is cancerous (prevent cell suicide). What could possibly go wrong? Interesting that the article makes no mention of a long-term study to see whether the drug in fact causes cancer. The “remarkable result” if legitimate is perhaps academically interesting but may be of no practical value in cancer treatment if it merely triggers massive cancer throughout the body (which seems quite possible). If legitimate, however, it could enable a human being to commit slow-motion suicide but able to perform some tasks in a high-radiation environment for a longer time than if untreated. Potentially some military applications here. It is pretty creepy they are torturing and killing primates for this purpose. Oh yeah, it’s not torture if it’s not a human, right?
Stine..I admire your passion; however , your facts regarding cancer treatment and survival rates are way off.
stine, you drink too much kool-aid. get an education.
[...] MedHeadlines» Cancer Drugs Medical Research Prevention » New Drug Prevents Radiation Damage (tags: readthis medicine) Posted in Links. [...]
The greatest amount of radiation exposure from a nuclear event doesn’t come from the initial blast. Yes there is tremendous damage to those immediately outside of the blast radius/death zone from the high energy ionizing radiation, including neutron radiation. Some exposure of concern comes from metal objects that would be activated by the neutron radiation, however the contamination(basically radioactive dust particles) that is inhaled or allowed to sit on your skin gives the chronic dose. The greatest exposure would come in the form of Alpha and Beta radiation from the contamination. An Alpha particle is a Helium atom without its electrons and Beta is a higher enrgy particle. Alpha radiation is not harmful and not penetrating (stopped by the skin) unless it gets inside fo your body and GI tract or lungs where there is no protection and serious damage can occur. Beta radiation penetrates the first few layers of skin, but not clothing, so your external exposure may look like a sunburn but with greater cellular damage. If the contaminated particles are Beta emitters then your insides can really get a dose.
OK, I’m done now.
“Think About It” (18) has a point — quote “Let’s see… they find a drug which makes the entire body behave as if it is cancerous (prevent cell suicide). What could possibly go wrong?”
Isn’t that exactly what big Pharma is looking for? Modern notions of medical practice and Profit, by redistribution of wealth, which in turn can be stimulated by redistribution of health, are not unrelated. After all, none of us wants a collapse of Wall Street’s investment houses. Let’s all hope and prey, that Gudkov gets his American Dream fulfilled, and becomes a billionaire, and that our notions of Wall St. Profits, by redistribution of wealth, including those of big Pharma, by redistribution of symptoms while amplifying underlying medical causes, so as to cause a redistribution of health, can be preserved as the lawful perpetuity that it must, by universal proclamation, be.
Wow! What a great advancement. Especially for Cancer patients. My late Mother had Breast Cancer with bone issues that were treated with radiation & bone enhancement drugs. Her last radiation treatment ruined her life since she stopped eating.
Their were other issues but had she not had the radiation side effects her quality of life might have been better.
Keep the research going.
Norman
Two major points: (a) Because it would be catastrophic emergency the drug should be free — meaning compnay makes no money (b) what is the point when a world conflgration erupts..no value to humanity, and loss of human life is the least important thing.
The utility in cancer treatment will be so much limited that company will never make profit because will be hounded by lawsuits. For example, 800 out of some 25 million who took COX2 inhibitor dies, causing several cox2 inhibitor makers to shelf ~60billion dollars in reserve to fight the lawsuit.
Furthermore, take example of bone calcifier medicines, some are “attributed” to cause tuberomandibular cancer. Guess hwat happens to the drug maker…pissing in the pants!
Finally, if you count how many “shokcing” headlines have really turned into markatble medicines, you will be shcked–98% fail to make second headline story.
“Think About It” (18)
Taking only the information in the article above, your argument seems valid. However, with some background information on NF-KB you will soon realize that the drug is as unlikely to cause cancer.than a bacterial infection (notice the drug takes its active ingredient from a bacterium). A short-term activation of the NF-KB pathway occurs as a reaction to many different stimuli your cells are exposed to every day. The way I read the above information this is exactly what you would get — short term activation prior to and during radiation therapy sessions
Regarding the hazard of the radiation therapy itself in presence of the drug:
Think about the skin cancer league’s education program. They always tell you that severe sunburn leading to peeling skin before the age of 25 is at the origin of most melanomas — even the ones people get at 80. This is because a single mutation is not enough to switch a normal cell to a cancer cell. It takes a combination of mutations (a large set of different combinations may lead to similar cancerous growths and symptoms but leaves the cancer/patient with differing outcomes of a given therapy — see cancer sub-types). Depending on the radiation dosage and pre-existing mutations, it is likely that a new cancer will only arise at a much later date. When the choice is between dying of cancer at 60 and radiation therapy with this protection and an associated increase in the risk of having another cancer elsewhere in the body at 75-90 I think the choice from a medical perspective will be simple. In the end, considerations of religion, and personal beliefs will still affect the patient’s own decision, but the doctors will be able to state the medical facts pretty clearly on that one.
Cheers,
A few points to clarify
This is to Stine…
I was diagnosed with cancer last year. I agree with you that if we found and solved the problem of the cause of the tumors, we would be much better off. However, it seems as though everything causes cancer these days. Those idiots who won’t stop smoking, even though they KNOW it is a carcinogen, also pollute OUR air; we have no control over this. I was always the outcast growing up in the 60’s…I opted not to smoke, do drugs or drink. I am glad to see that this is a changing trend.
I have friends living in Grand Blanc, MI. Their water tested five times the maximum limit for arsenic. They had to buy a filter for their house to the tune of $1600.00. They also have to change the liner periodically or the affected water can leach through the system. My friends are constantly ill. They tell me that the water tested fine going through this filter, but does it? Is there something else in it that is making them ill? The toxic dump there hurts people living near them, but the owners are making money off allowing Canada to continue to dump their toxic waste there, so who cares about those people who have cancer? We have no control over that, either. Too bad they don’t realize that someday soon, it might be THEM, or someone they love, who gets cancer. They will be wondering what caused their tumors. People need to wake up and see the reality of this before the entire country gets terminally ill.
Geez, what a bunch of cynical whiners. Yeah, if I hear on the radio that someone has launched a missle aimed at the USA I would be happy to have something I can take 15 or 30 minutes beforehand, crawl into a ditch or other low place or get a hill between me and any possible target and take the med if I think I am near a target zone. I’d love to have the med in case of radioactive fallout that might contaminte my water supply… sounds great to me. As far as the primates… we have to test things on something. Primates are good for that. I have no problem with it. Too bad we can’t train primates to mine coal for us. I wonder if they taste good?