Our Propriotary Nanoparticles Target Cancer

There is currently a lot of effort put into nanotechnology, the study and develpment of nanoparticles and most of this centers around cancer research. Nanotechnology at present focuses a lot on gold nanoparticles, because they are easy to make, and carbon nanotubes. Unfortunately there is building evidence that carbon nanotubes have major drawbacks when put into the body. We took an entirely different approach to nanotechnology. We started with the rules that we would NOT use any nanotechnology that wasn't normal to the body, we would make sure our nanotechnology was effective at penetrating cancer cells, we would verify that our nanotechnology had no bad side effects and that it DID improve the fight against cancer. We succeeded at his about 6 years ago and have been using it regularly and expanding on it to make new alternative medicines. Our nanotechnology has developed into an array of nanoparticle based medications that are incredibly effective against cancer.

Several researchers around the world are trying to develop nanoparticle encased sensitizers, because they target cancer far more specifically. We have already achieved that goal with our present sensitizer. While it is not difficult to create nanoparticles, it is quite difficult to control their size and how they aggregate and assemble. It is also important to control how well the nanoparticles penetrate cancer cells. We use a nanoparticle that enhances the sensitizer uptake. Other researchers are working with gold nanoparticles, because it is the easiest nanoparticle to make, but ask yourself this, does cancer have a desire for gold bling ? Probably not, your girl friend may like gold, but cancer prefers sugar. Our nanoparticles look like sugar to the cancer.

discrete nanoparticles for cancer

One huge advantage of our nanoparticles is the fact that they reduce accumulation of the sensitizer in the skin, which makes patients safer from sun damage.

According to our tests, the total accumulation in the skin with the nanoparticle is less than 5% as much as the same sensitizer when not in the nanoparticle formulation.

cancer nanoparticles aggretated
This photo shows our nanoparticles singly and in clusters. They are about 25 nanometers. Cancer cells can take this size nano particles in, and they are less likely to cross into normal tissue because of what is referred to as the leaky vasculature limited lymphatic perfusion trap. (patent pending)

nanoparticle test

wihout and  with nanoparticles

When the solution the nanoparticle is contained in is allowed to evaporate, the individual molecules come together in specific patterns controlled by the nature of the nanoparticle. In this photo you can see that the nanoparticle size which is incorporated into tubules is on the order of 25 - 35 nanometers.

In the photo above, the brighter it is the higher the concentration of sensitizer is

Our Nanoparticles Kill Cancer Even Without PDT

To our surprise it turns out that the nanoparticles alone, without sensitizer or laser, kill cancer cells to about the same degree as chemotherapy, but the nanoparticles cause NO damage to healthy tissue.

We make the oral nanoparticle solution available to cancer patients for follow up after PDT. The nanoparticle solution has no taste and is made from things you eat all the time, a meat preservative and a filler compound use in ice cream and yoghurt.

liver cancer nanoparticles

  Normal liver cancer cells before treatment       Same liver cancer cells after Nanoparticles

Cancer treatment with Nanoparticles

As mentioned above, nanoparticles are crucial to cancer treatment. In my opinion anyone who is not using nanoparticles is incompetent. We have known since the early 70's nanoparticles were vital for cancer management, in those days they called nanoparticles the magic bullet because they can target all cancer specifically and they promised they would be in use in ten years, the same old thing they always say.

Now, 43 years later, who is using nanoparticles for cancer treatment? I don't mean researching them, I mean actually using them.

The reason nanoparticles are SO important for cancer is simple.. you put the medication in the nanoparticles and inject them into the blood. You know food and nutrients penetrate the blood vessels, right? That is how all food and oxygen get to the cells. But nanoparticles are TOO BIG to get out of normal vessels.

So what happens is normal tissue never sees the nanoparticles or the medication inside them. When the nanoparticles find cancer it is a different story. Cancer, like all scar tissue, builds leaky vasculature the space between the arteries and veins cells is greater and larger things can get out, so the nanoparticles flood into the cancer eagerly. When the nanoparticles are perfectly designed, they have a positive charge which causes cancer to pull them in like a star trek tractor beam and when the cancer tastes them, OUR nanoparticles taste like sugar.

Cancer does not build lymph vessels, which are what removes things from the body, hence the term leaky vasculature limited lymphatic perfusion trap the term used to describe the method by which nanoparticles target cancer.

Most photosensitizers are only 3 to 6.8 X selective, that is to say they only go into cancer 6.8 times more than normal tissue. This is why nobody else can treat deep metastatic cancer, because the normal tissue would be damaged.

Our sensitizer is 85 X selective, which is a massive improvement that nobody else can come close to. As you can see in several places on this site, thanks to our nanoparticle technology we can treat down to the center of the brain, treating kidneys and colons is not a problem.

When you are looking for alternative cancer treatment, always put a high importance on nanoparticles designed to treat cancer.

Photodynamic Therapy for Cancer treatment with Nanomolecules

It is important to understand what nanoparticles do for cancer treatment when used with photodynamic therapy. As I mentioned above, sensitizers which are not in a nanomolecule spread all over the body, like chemo, so without the nanomolecules the cancer only takes up maybe at best 7 times as much medicine as normal cells.

This has three major effects. First, without the nanoparticles the cancer does not get as much sensitizer, because it is going into normal tissue throughout the body. The second effect is that the normal cells are subject to damage caused by the laser, but with the nanoparticles cancer has 85 times as much medicine as normal cells.

The third effect is a little more complicated, it is called self shielding. The medicine called a photosensitizer absorbs the laser light very fast, so if you are trying to use photodynamic therapy to treat say a tumor or tumors in the brain, the sensitizer in the skin and skull and normal brain absorb most of the light before it gets to the tumor and the treatment is a failure.

When the sensitizer for photodynamic therapy is in a nanoparticle, there is very little sensitizer in normal tissue, so we can penetrate down to the center of the brain and deep into the body. When a nanoparticle is not used, there is no hope of getting deep into the body.

As far as I know, and I do keep up on what everyone in the world is doing, we are the only group that has created a nanoparticle encased sensitizer for cancer treatment, which explains why we get much better results than anyone else.

When you are trying to evaluate a photodynamic therapy provider, you need to understand a few things to keep from making a big mistake.

First, some wavelengths of light, colors in laymans terms, penetrate better than others. The sensitizer that is used determines the wavelength necessary. There are several different sensitizer and they are vastly different in success.

If a provider offers therapy without giving the specific sensitizer name and the wavelength of light, avoid them like the plague, they are tryint to cover something up. If they say they are using Photofrin, also called hematoporphyrin, or PPIX (protoporhyrin nine) or ALA, their wavelength is 635 nm (sort of orangish red) and they can never penetrate more than one cm into normal tissue and .3 cm into tumor, so they are pretty worthless. The next one you will encounter is slightly better, it is called chlorin e6. There are several derivatives and compounds of this but they all are activated by 660 nm, a normal red color and they can at best penetrate 3 cm into the body and .8 cm into tumors, so this one is ok for skin cancers and basal cell carcinoma, in short anything that is on top of the skin, but cannot treat deep tumors or metastic cancer.

There are others using phthalocyanine base, but their product is an impure mix of different drugs, some of which are worthless and some of which are dangerous. We are the only group using a mix of only disulfonate and trisulfonate, because nobody else knows how to do it. (patent pending) Consequently they use 672 nm wavelength, which while is is better than chlorine e6 has limited penetration.

Due to our unique molecule and the nanoparticle formulation and the purity and research we have done on intracellular absorption spectra of our molecule, we use 685 nm, which is a very deep red on the edge of infrared invisible. It is perfect, no other wavelength works as well.

The main thing you need to know is what is the exact wavelength of the light produced by their lasers. If they are using something other than lasers, run they don't know what they are doing.

For success you need 685 nm the smaller the number is the less effective it is until you get down to 635 nm which is essentially worthless.

Then you need to know how selective their uptake is.. everyone else in the world is between 3 and 6.8 times as much sensitizer in the cancer as in normal tissue.

If they are not using nanoparticles that is the best they can do and it is not good enough for serious cancer work. As I said, we are the only ones actually using nanomolecules and we get results the other only wish they could get.

Be aware, there are research papers on this site discussing various nanomolecules, none of them cover what we are doing, and on their own without our improvements they are relatively ineffective.

 

 

Google