WHO'S DR. OTTO WARBURG?

13 Posts | Page(s): 1 2  Next 

WHO'S DR. OTTO WARBURG?

by K_C_1 on Wed Apr 01, 2009 12:00 AM

Quote | Reply

Good Morning Everyone;

I found the following post here at CC while doing some lurking. Thank you GREATLIFE for the post. (BOLD additions are mine)

The Dr. Otto Warburg Story

In 1931 Dr. Otto Warburg won the Nobel Prize for showing that cancer thrives in anaerobic (without oxygen), or acidic, conditions. In other words, the main cause for cancer is acidity of the human body. Disease can not survive in an Alkaline Body, Only drink Ionized Alkaline Water.

Today we have an ocean of confusing information, articles in which different experts state many different reasons for illness. However, I think that the main reason for illness was stated very clearly in 1931! Over 75 years ago, Otto Warburg was awarded the Nobel prize for his discovery that cancer is caused by weakened cell respiration due to lack of oxygen at the cellular level. According to Warburg, damaged cell respiration causes fermentation, resulting in low pH (acidity) at the cellular level.

Dr. Warburg, in his Nobel Prize winning study, illustrated the environment of the cancer cell. A normal healthy cell undergoes an adverse change when it can no longer take in oxygen to convert glucose into energy. In the absence of oxygen, the cell reverts to a primal nutritional program to nourish itself by converting glucose through the process of fermentation. The lactic acid produced by fermentation lowers the cell pH (acid/alkaline balance) and destroys the ability of DNA and RNA to control cell division. The cancer cells then begin to multiply. The lactic acid simultaneously causes severe local pain as it destroys cell enzymes. Cancer appears as a rapidly growing external cell covering, with a core of dead cells.

Dr. Otto Warburg finished one of his most famous speeches with the following statement: "…nobody today can say that one does not know what cancer and its prime cause is. On the contrary, there is no disease whose prime cause is better known, so that today ignorance is no longer an excuse that one cannot do more about prevention."[2]

Otto Warburg won the Nobel Prize for showing that cancer thrives in anaerobic (without oxygen), or acidic, conditions. In other words, the main cause for cancer is acidity of the human body.

By the time I read his genius speech, he had been dead a long time. I wonder, if this discovery was so important that he received the Nobel Prize, why doesn't everyone know what pH is?

As soon as scientists discovered what healthy human blood pressure and temperature are supposed to be, devices were invented to measure them. Whenever I went to a doctor, my blood pressure and temperature were measured, but I don't ever remember a doctor measuring my pH. High blood pressure and fever, though not pleasant, do not cause cancer. The acidic condition of the blood does. It is not my opinion; it is what the internationally renowned scientist Dr. Warburg has proven. For this statement he won the Nobel Prize. As the outcome of the recognition of his discovery, I think it is vital to make pH information available at once to everyone.

For some  incredible info on a technology that has been used in the hospitals in Japan for over 34 years go to www.aquamiracle.com

Comments anyone?

Take care;

Kevin

RE: WHO'S DR. OTTO WARBURG?

by Chapbin on Wed Apr 01, 2009 12:00 AM

Quote | Reply

Hey Kevin,

I guess they know whats going on in the normal and cancer cells but what do you do to prevent it or change it after it happens?

Is this why a PET scan works? The tumors absorb the sugar solution and show up on the scan.

Its such a damn complicated problem.

Mike

RE: WHO'S DR. OTTO WARBURG?

by trehouse60 on Thu Apr 02, 2009 12:00 AM

Quote | Reply

I definitely agree that Dr Otto Warburg should have been a major world hero, but his discoveries, if heeded, would have put a stop to the then just-beginning-to-grow- cancer-drug-treatment-money-making machine. Thus the powers that be very effectively did everything they could to discredit him and hush his research up, to the very great financial gain of a very few, and the unneeded suffering and loss of life to the very many.

As for alkalizing the body to fight cancer in general, I think this process is unwittingly misrepresented by some alternative advocates. Actually it's not the acidity of the blood that allows cancer cells to grow, but rather the cytoplasma in the cells themselves.  There's a big difference here - one that I think is very hard for lay people to grasp - but one that can mean the difference between success and failure.

Yes, very acidic blood is dangerous to the heart, lungs, kidneys, liver, and brain. Therefore our kidneys, liver, endocrine system, respiratory system, adrenal hormones,  etc, work very hard in concert to keep the blood pH close to neutral.  The same thing is true of very alkaline blood - it is very damaging to the organs, and the body works very hard to keep the bloodstream from becoming too alkaline.  This whole process is called acid/base balance - it is extremely complicated, and messing around with it too much can be fatal. That is the primary reason why I caution people about using baking soda for alkalization, and I have many of the same concerns about ionized alkaline water.

As for ionized alkaline water, there's a lot of disagreement in both the scientific and medical AND alternative communities about its use.  WHile  I do not doubt that ionized alkaline water can have some benefit to the body, I think there are some big drawbacks in largely depending upon it to fight cancer. Ionized alkaline water goes directly to the stomach, where it is largely neutralized by the stomach acids before it is absorbed into the bloodstream.  Thus the amount of it that has remained alkaline by the time it reaches the cells is very small.  Plus the fact that the molecules of this  water are small enough to  be absorbed directly into the serum plasma itself - where it could have some adverse effect on the heart, kidneys, etc. 

But for most cancers, the pH of blood (serum plasma) is not what supports cancer growth.  It's the pH of the fluid inside the cells - which is called cytoplasm - that we need to be worried about.  Cellular pH is different than blood pH - they both have a different "normal" range.  The cytoplasm in cells (the fluid component of cells) can tolerate a much wider range from acidic to alkaline  than can the bloodstream.  To get enough alkalinity into the cells through absorption of water means putting  a LOT of alkaline water into the bloodstream, and there are many who are convinced that is not a good idea.

Conversely, consuming extremely acidic fluids is a very bad idea.  Soda pop is an extreme example - it is very acidic, it is very high in sugar - dextrose (unless sugar free - then you run into problems with artificial sweeteners like aspartame being very poisonous to the system,) and most sodas now are made fizzy through phosphorilation (phosphoric acid) instead of carbonation (sodium bicarbonate - or better known as baking soda.)  Phosphoric acid is indeed extremely acidic, is absorbed extremely rapidly into the bloodstream where it puts tremendous stress on the liver, kidneys, pancreas, and gall bladder, and even brain,  and over time or in very large quantities can cause irreversible damage to these organs, as well as contributing in a major way toward obesity.  By totally cutting out "carbonated" beverages from the diet, a person can make major strides toward normalizing body pH. (The exception would be the use of lemon-lime or citrus sodas, or ginger ale, to ease nausea, or provide liquid calories for those whose dietary intake is compromised.)

So, while ionized alkaline water MIGHT help in the fight against cancer, for some people it might not be an especially good choice. There are, however, foods, supplements, herbs, botanicals, that can have a marked effect on cellular pH without affecting the pH of the bloodstream, and therefore would be very helpful in the primary effort to alkalize the body.  Many of the foods that naturalists have recommended for decades for fighting cancer have a bitter component to them.  Sometimes that is because they contain quantities of vitamin b-17, which is bitter, but even more often it is because those foods are slightly alkaline in nature.  Asparagus is a good example of this.  Juicing or blending asparagus  (either fresh, frozen or canned) with a little pure fresh water, and then drinking 3 - 4 tbsp of the mixture at least once a day will help to alkalinize the body's cells, without affecting the blood pH.

Wheat and barley grass, and many of the other "greens" mixtures are very alkaline, and should be considered as major players in alkalization.  The alkaline molecules get carried along in the bloodstream without really being absorbed into the plasma, therefore they have little effect on serum pH.  Once absorbed into the cells, the process of metabolism takes over, and the alkaline content is released into the cytoplasm, thus raising the cellular pH. (A word of caution: because wheat and barley grass ARE so alkaline, they can be caustic to the stomach - juiced fresh grass isn't so bad, especially since most people usually dilute it with other fruits or veggies to counter the flavor, but I recommend taking the tablets with food to prevent an upset tummy.)

Many trace minerals (like potassium, zinc, manganese, magnesium) work to alkalize the body.  Unfortunately industrialization has removed much of the nutrient value from food, therefore many people do not get adequate trace minerals.  Supplementing with these will help to restore the body from a hyper-acidic state.  Again, because they are alkaline, take them with food.  

White mulberry leaf and extract is very alkaline, yet very safe for human consumption.  The Chinese have used it for centuries to alkalinize the body, and well as mushrooms that contain morus alba.  The mechanism of action is the same - molecules too large to be absorbed into serum plasma are carried along into the cells, where they then can work to raise cytoplasmal pH. White mulberry is an excellent choice for those who have irritable bladders due to hyperacidity, as it is metabolized in the cells and then excreted through the kidneys, thereby raising urinary pH. 

There are also other ways of inhibiting glycolysis - the fermentation of sugar in the cells, thus stopping cancer cells from getting the energy they need.  Fructose, citric acid, and acetic acid are major inhibitors of glycolysis.  That's one of the reasons why an apple a day keeps the dr away, despite the fact that is has sugar in it.  The primary sugar in an apple is fructose, plus it contains acetic acid which is carried by the fructose into the cancer cells - a double whammy against glycolysis.  This is also why citrus fruit is a good choice for those fighting cancer - the sugar in them carries the citric acid directly to the cancer cells.   Berries also contain a fair amount of fructose and acetic acid, plus a whole host of other powerful phytochemicals. Strawberries and cranberries can be a major foe against cancer, plus the fact that they are both alkalizers (henceforth the choice of cranberry juice for urinary tract infections.) 

I know that there are recommendations from some advocating alternative medicine to check urinary pH to determine the alkalinity of the body. The pH of urine is a much more accurate reflection of what is going on in serum plasma than what is going on in the cells. Not all alkalizers are excreted through the kidneys - some are eliminated through the bowel, thus monitoring urinary pH is only a half measure. Checking salivary pH is  a better approximation of cellular pH, but again, it's not an exact measure.

(Raising cellular pH is also one of the goals/mechanisms of action of alternative therapies like cesium chloride - but these chemicals are extremely potent, and should be used only under the supervision of a physician experienced in their application.)

To be fair, I must admit that my knowledge of multiple myeloma and other blood-borne cancers is NOT my forte. I've not done much reading specifically as to the effects of alkalizing against  these specific cancers (MM, leukemia, etc) thus I'm not sure if blood pH might have more effect on growth of these types of cancer than say, breast or pancreatic or lung cancer.  Even though blood cells and bone marrow are physiologically  like every other cell - a bunch of organelles and cytoplasm surrounded by a membrane, I'm not sure how much their cellular pH differs from plasma pH.  Blood producing cells  indeed are constantly bathed in the serum component of the blood, so I suppose it's possible that things like ionized alkaline water may have more of a deterrent effect on blood-borne disease , but I do not know that for sure.  I certainly would be interested in reading references others might have to offer.

THis is an excellent web site about alkalization:  http://www.alkalizeforhealth.net/   Click on the "Saliva pH test" link for much more information - including lots of good stuff about using fruits and veggies and supplements.  (The site does present a somewhat different viewpoint on ionized alkalized water and some of the other things I've said - but that's ok. Take my opinion with a grain of salt, or not!)

Sincerely,

Tre

RE: WHO'S DR. OTTO WARBURG?

by trehouse60 on Thu Apr 02, 2009 12:00 AM

Quote | Reply

As I've just read back through KC's post, and then spent some time looking at the link I recommended, www.alkalizeforhealth.net, I've realized that there's a very important part of the post on Warburg's work that I did not address in my earlier reply (it was very late at night after a very long day, and I was well on the way to brain exhaustion!)

Warburg didn't really say that hyperacidity causes cancer - he said that inadequate oxygenation of cells causes cancer.  True - cancer loves an acid environment and cannot survive in an alkaline environment, but the even more important aspect of Warburg's work is the discovery that cancer cells cannot survive in the presence of oxygen. It is anaerobic state -  inadequate oxygenation - that promotes fermentation and the production of lactic acid that eventually brings about hyperacidity. Hence,  alkalinizing the body is not the sole answer.  Alkalizing may indeed work to destroy present cancer cells, but unless some effort is made to permanently correct insufficient oxygenation while simultaneously maintaining a more alkaline cellular environment, the cancer may possibly have a mechanism by which to return.

The theory behind baking soda treatment - a tsp consumed once or twice a day - is not just that baking soda alkalinizes the body, but that it also oxygenates the body.  When you mix an acid and a base (alkaline substance like baking soda) you get a very strong reaction, one of the by-products of which is the release of oxygen.  (Drop a tsp of vinegar on a tsp of baking soda and watch it fizz - that's exactly what I'm talking about.) Some people say that the interaction of baking soda with gastric acids does the same thing (which it indeed does) and that the resulting oxygen is then absorbed into the blood stream and carried to the cells.  The research on that - at least what I've seen - is inconclusive.  It may be more likely  that instead of being absorbed by the bloodstream, the released oxygen and other gaseous by-products are just passed out through the alimentary (digestive) tract as -  you guessed it - gas. That's why many antacids (including sodium bicarb - baking soda) make people burp - as the alkaline antacid neutralizes the excess stomach acid, oxygen (technically hydrogen peroxide) and other gases are released and take the easiest available escape - up the esophagus. Therefore "oxygenation" by baking soda taken orally might not be of benefit at all.

Dr Simoncini in Italy is getting some pretty good results with baking soda treatment, but he is giving it intravenously while strictly monitoring  the individual to maintain safety as concerns the body's acid/base balance.  IV administration avoids neutralization of the baking soda by the hydrochloric acid in the stomach, thus the serum pH is raised, and as sodium bicarbonate reaches cells, it is absorbed and metabolized and oxygen is released.  (This is one of the reasons why IV sodium bicarbonate is a very effective drug when treating the acidosis brought on by cardiac arrest.)

Vitamin C, especially when given intravenously, is thought to be a major oxygenator of cells. The theory here is that ascorbic acid aids in the production of hydrogen peroxide in the cells, thus causing the cells to be super saturated with oxygen. 

The theory behind drinking ionized alkaline water is that it will do the same thing - carry oxygen to the cells. But I still have concerns about the safety of drinking nothing but ionized alkaline water. Since it goes directly to the stomach where neutralization will occur, this puts added stress on the digestive tract.  We have to have those acids to be able to digest our food.  If too much of the acid is neutralized by the fluids we drink, the body will try to make more, and it becomes a vicious cycle. Alkaline, oxygen rich foods, herbs and those supplements whose primary breakdown and absorption occurs in the bowel rather than the stomach  have a much gentler effect on the system, yet can be just as (or even more) effective once they get into the cells and are metabolized.

This is why I prefer to drink a pure pH neutral water, such as steam distilled or reverse osmosis filtered water - absorption into the blood stream is immediate without altering serum pH or neutralizing the gastric juices. It also makes an excellent carrier for the alkalizing and oxygenating nutrient portions of foods, supplements and herbs.

All of this is also why adequate exercise is vital in both battling and preventing cancer.  We can add oxygen to our bodies  via the stomach, but I don't think there is any best substitute for taking in oxygen through the lungs. Unfortunately, many of us in the world do not live where there is clean air. If you have to walk on the streets of the neighborhood, chances are you are taking in quite a bit of pollutants that take their toll on the body, as well as presenting potential carcinogens. (Our earth is in trouble, and us with it.) 

Many people are looking for a quick fix, a panacea for curing cancer - just one or two things you can do and then miraculously have the cancer be gone.  Life just doesn't work that way - not for the majority of people. (everybody's body chemistry is different - the people for whom a single therapy like artemisinin or IV vitamin C, etc, is all they need are very few.) It seems that most people are best served by NOT putting all their eggs in one basket, but rather by initiating and adhering to a broader approach, one that covers a multitude of bases. 

So, to be on the safe side, exercise at least a little bit every day, take vitamin c, make sure you are getting enough minerals (potassium, calcium, zinc, manganese, magnesium, selenium, etc), all of the b vitamins, vitamins a, d, e, f, and k, plus essential fatty acids and enzymes. If you can tolerate them, eat foods that are rich in vitamin b17. Make sure you're getting enough iron (many people say that you have to decrease iron to fight cancer because cancer thrives on iron, but the fact is that our bodies still have to have enough iron to provide adequate oxygenation, and there are many alternative remedies that also have to have iron to work.) This whole process requires more than just taking a multi-vitamin every day. Instead, make sure to eat  lots of fresh fruits and veggies, herbs and spices, take supplements if you can, exercise, and drink plenty of fresh pure water.  All of these "treatments" can go a VERY long way toward meeting the conditions that Warburg said we need to stop cancer.

Sincerely,

Tre 

RE: WHO'S DR. OTTO WARBURG?

by mmsurvivor on Thu Apr 02, 2009 12:00 AM

Quote | Reply
Thanks you Kevin and Tre for 2 wonderful articles on how to help ourselves.   While I occasionally use a form of ph water I use vit C buffered powder and Pure cold pressed aloe to help my ph.  Eating right and avoiding sugars etc helps...Great Info...MMS

RE: WHO'S DR. OTTO WARBURG?

by K_C_1 on Fri Apr 03, 2009 12:00 AM

Quote | Reply

Good Afternoon Mike;

I guess they know whats going on in the normal and cancer cells but what do you do to prevent it or change it after it happens?

Then you and I would be on the cover of Medical Journal and selling OUR patented Cancer Curing Tonic!

Its such a damn complicated problem.

Further complicated by the corruption Tre speaks of.

Take care;

Kevin

RE: WHO'S DR. OTTO WARBURG?

by K_C_1 on Fri Apr 03, 2009 12:00 AM

Quote | Reply

Good Afternoon Tre;

But his discoveries, if heeded, would have put a stop to the then just-beginning-to-grow- cancer-drug-treatment-money-making machine. Thus the powers that be very effectively did everything they could to discredit him and hush his research up, to the very great financial gain of a very few, and the unneeded suffering and loss of life to the very many.

You said a mouthful with statement! What ever hapenned to the axiom "Do no harm"?

With regards to mushrooms, I have read that mushrooms are a fungus and this also leads to an imbalance in our bodies that cancer thrives on. What's your opinion on this?

And you better be careful with your posts or many are going to start thinking you're a doctor! Always a pleasure reading them though!

Take care;

Kevin

RE: WHO'S DR. OTTO WARBURG?

by K_C_1 on Fri Apr 03, 2009 12:00 AM

Quote | Reply

Good Afternoon MMS;

Thank you Kevin and Tre for 2 wonderful articles on how to help ourselves.  

No thanks for me, Tre did all the work!

I just found the first article quite interesting and wanted to share it with the family. But I do agree with what Tre has to say about the possible "cover-up"  of why the medical community doesn't apply what this doctor discovered so many years ago.

As I've said many times, when ever I talk to the doctors about diet or pH they give me the "look" as if I'm some witch doctor trying to challange their authority.

And from reading (and rereading) Tre's post, she certainly is more in tune with Dr. Warburg's theory than my present day doctors.

Take care;

Kevin

RE: WHO'S DR. OTTO WARBURG?

by sandmacker on Sun Jul 18, 2010 12:59 PM

Quote | Reply

Not only is keeping the body alkaline , but to eat raw foods is also important . If you have cooked food first and foremost , the immune system attacks that cooked food .This then 'occupies' your immune system into not protecting or fighting the damaging things in the body .Ironically , if you have something cold before you have the warm food , this will not happen .

And the 'types' of protein we have can trigger on and off certain tumours .We have vegetable ,processed , and animal proteins .They experimented with caesine protein ,of which makes up for 85% of the protein found in milk . By lowering the caesine protein in rats they found they could turn the tumours off and on like a tap .In the cell they found that the caesine protein activated an enzyme that helped attached the carsnigenes to the DNA of the cell . When the cell reproduced with the damage that had been done , they found they could reverse it by cutting back on the caesine proteins . Apparantly we are only to have about 5>10% proteins in our diet , as has human breast milk , and the western diet we have is saturated in protein that has us with the highest cases of cancer in the world as opposed to the third world countries that die due to the lack of nutrients or hygene .This information is better illustrated by professor Campbell in the book , The China Study

RE: WHO'S DR. OTTO WARBURG?

by DrTCH on Sat Aug 11, 2012 11:12 PM

Quote | Reply

I appreciate your material, but it is slightly incorrect.

Dr. Warburg, in his Nobel Prize winning study, illustrated the environment of the cancer cell. A normal healthy cell undergoes an adverse change when it can no longer take in oxygen to convert glucose into energy. In the absence of oxygen, the cell reverts to a primal nutritional program to nourish itself by converting glucose through the process of fermentation.

In healthy mammalian tissue, serum glucose (which is the form of nutrition the body uses to power itself), in the presence of oxygen, is broken down to pyruvic acid. In turn, this product is fed into the Kreb's Cycle, Oxidative Phosphorylation and the Electron Transport Chain. This is a very efficient process, and occurs at a pH of approximately 7.  When there is an excessive level of blood sugar, and insufficient oxygen, the cell shifts over to another process. The pyruvic acid created by glycolysis moves into two new pathways.

One is toward the production of lactate acid (like that produced in an overworked muscle, which produces the "burn"). Another is known as fermentation, and the end-products are alcohol and CO2 (and various alcohol break-down products such as aldehyde, which are toxic to the liver). The build-up of lactic acid leads to a lowering (acidification) of the blood to approximately 6.

Then we need to understand that a lot of the lactic acid is recycled by the liver back into more blood glucose. And, that fermentation, as a process, is supported by a relatively low pH (and reversed by a high pH). Both of these suggest a kind of vicious cycle or "downward spiral." There are a number of other things going on, including the production, by malignant cells, of chemicals which produce more blood vessels ("neovascularization"), w/o which the tumor formed could not grow or metastasize. Another is a shift in the electrolyte balance, from potassium to sodium.

In end-stage cancer, the malignant mass cannot get all the sugar it wants, so it breaks down not only fat, but even protein (to glucose), so the disease is feeding upon the very body substance and structure upon which it depends. This “wasting away” process is known as “cachexia.” And, it can be detected easily by anyone visiting a cancer ward, by the very disagreeable smell permeating the ward.

The point of all this is to understand that cancer as understood by the conventional model is like an invader, caused by genetic defect, environmental factors, and probably a microbe, and is characterized by uncontrollable, crazy cell division of undifferentiated cell forms, which form a tissue mass (tumor), and eventually spread (“metastasis”) to the rest of the body. The alternative model understands malignancy as a fundamental shift in cellular metabolism, more exactly a disruption of normal cellular respiration, to be replaced by a very maladaptive, life-threatening one--a process which might be reversed.

Once one understands what might be called the characteristic “signature” of this shift, certain solutions begin to present themselves. Ones that an ethical physician would want to examine and employ, in the absence of any other important conflicting evidence (or stupidity or vested interest in the pharmaceutical companies).

Dr. T.C.Halle

Los Angeles, Calif.

Some of the relevant biochemistry is pretty damn complicated.

 (I will add that I find some comments by individuals, such as "trehouse60," to be very interesting, and worthy of examination.)

13 Posts | Page(s): 1 2  Next 
Subscribe to this message board discussion

Latest Messages

View More

We care about your feedback. Let us know how we can improve your CancerCompass experience.