FDA approval (link updated 18 March 2013)
Others are also waiting:
I had a tumor on my L4 and 11 lesions on my liver as of Sept 8. I had 10 treatments of radiation on my back and that tumor is dead. I then had 3 courses of chemo, Gemzarine and Taxotere which did absolutely nothing for my liver, I now have numerous lesions so this is a fairly aggressive cancer.
Yes, Dave and Gage, this does work. This compound , (S)-2-Amino-3-(3-phenylacetylimidazol-4-yl)propanoic acid, kills cancer cells - with no demonstrated toxicity to healthy cells. No surgical excision, no chemotherapy, no radiation therapy.
The only impediment to advancing the approval process is funding. I have been doing this for years - with my own personal funds and they are almost exhausted. As soon as funds are available this compound will go to GMP synthesis, CRO toxicology... and human clinical trials (Phase I - Phase I/II hybrid) can start as soon as six months afterward. This compound is eligible for expedited approval, compassionate usage exemption, accelerated review, orphan drug status. Once again, we need finances to advance the process.http://cancercure-d.blogspot.com/
Thank you, again. Keep me apprised of events with yourself and Gage.
Dennis Wright "
With best wishes,
Reality bites 5b: the sharp edge bluntly
There is one slim hope for the losing player, and that is a stalemate, but I won't try to explain that here. Well, I did explain it, but it got too complicated and didn't add anything to this story, so a pointless paragraph is gone, and we're all the better for that.
In a stalemate, no-one wins. It's a Get Out of Jail Free card for the player who was going to lose. (Ah, sorry – I've just Monopolised my chess game....)
It seems the king is rapidly getting boxed in.
In a real game, the losing player will see defeat coming, shake hands with the opponent, and resign the game before having to play it out to an inevitable and perhaps humiliating conclusion.
Mr C doesn't like that ending. He may play a mean game of chess, but he only seeks growth at the expense of dependency, and the great irony is that his win is his own death. He will refuse to accept the resignation of his host and he will demand that the game be played out to the bitter end.
It may well be that he's more subtle than a mere biological cell-cloning program, and is capable of tiny mutations that render yesterday's treatments ineffective, or less effective than they were. His only intelligence is to find ways past the barriers that contain him and his influence. Don't be fooled; he may well be better at that game than many give him credit for, and this means researchers can be trapped in relying on outdated remedies or approaches and faith in faulty data. But that too is another story and takes me away from this one.
Here's the blunt bit. There is no honorable resignation for me. Our society, for all its multiplicity of reasons, some logical and some idiotic, decrees that the game must be played out to the last gasp. It allows no right for the player to decide just when the game should end, and thus, on grounds of higher purpose, denies the last shred of dignity in the process. And this is specially true in the sequence of events in dying from brain cancer, or other neurological calamities for the organism, where the invasion is into the core and very centre of our being.We are no longer who we were.
I've always accepted that life, by its very nature, is not fair. I go along with that. In the natural world, fairness is not an issue; for humans, fairness is a rather simplistic idea constructed by the mind, and exists only there. If you believe in fairness or unfairness in such cases, then you have the sticky question of explaining why it happened, morally – and most of the answers I've seen to that question are far from convincing. In fact, I'll go so far as to say they usually insult my intelligence.
So to me there is a terrible cruelty, with no redeeming feature, in cloaking the right to a dignified ending to the game in platitudes, specious arguments and blind dogma. None, including bishops and those new knights of the realm, our politicians, have any right to impose this nonsense upon those who do not accept their views. They play their games with our lives; but not content with that, with our deaths as well.
This didn't end up quite as you expected, did it? Me neither."
I don't usually make comments as I have always felt that the blog is 'Den's thing'.
I always appreciate your insightful comments Bob, and the stories you add to the mix. I fear that if other people were to contribute postings, the result would be just as much time and energy spent this end, in formatting and commenting on them - we all know he couldn't resist :-)
More importantly, the blog would no longer be about Denis and his journey, which has been very much the point.
Denis has spent a long time now, years actually, keeping everyone else informed and also entertained. I know you all appreciate how much time and effort this takes, not to mention answering the countless private emails and messages that this blog generates.
The blog has brought so many outside people in, who now feel very close to Denis and his circumstances. People that he hasn't spoken to in many years and probably may never have again, if things were 'normal'. That has been a wonderful thing for Denis and also, I feel, for them.
But then there are the people who are actually, physically here. Den's time is just as precious to us as it is to the many people who now feel that, in some small way, they own this journey as well.
So now, the selfish statement of my heart....
I sincerely hope that you would all wish, or at least understand, that as things progress into the end times that it will finally be a time for it to be just about Denis....and me....and his family.
- For myself I am an optimist - it does not seem to be much use being anything else.
- Sir Winston Churchill