GcMAF

31 mins read

Gcmaf is a vitamin D-binding protein. It’s clinically known as Gc protein-derived macrophage triggering aspect. It’s a protein that supports the body immune system, and naturally found in the body. Gcmaf activates macrophage cells, or the cells responsible for combating infection and illness. (1 )

Summary

The two newest publications on gcmaf aid reinterpreting the biological and medical outcomes separately observed in vitro and in vivo by a variety of scientists. The hypothesis that chondroitin sulfate may be accountable for the impacts thus far credited to gcmaf, resolves al the inconsistencies and contradictions that have characterized this field of immunotherapy. Additionally, this hypothesis lays the foundation for the development of non-proteinic macrophage triggering elements that are not extracted from human blood, hence preventing all the risks related to human blood-derived products. (2 ).

GcMAF Research study

A 1997 research study evaluated gcmaf on mice with cancer. It found that gcmaf improved their survival from 16 days to 32 days.

A couple of years later on, the scientists evaluated the treatment on people with breast, colorectal, and prostate cancers. They provided shots of a tiny amount of gcmaf when a week. After a few months, all of the clients were cured, according to the studies. Four to 7 years later on, their cancers had not come back.

These results sound impressive, but there were some big issues with the studies. For something, they were really little– simply eight to 16 people each. Everybody in the studies had actually already been on standard cancer treatments like surgical treatment, chemotherapy, or radiation. So it was difficult to inform whether these treatments, or gcmaf, caused the cancers to diminish.

Likewise, doctors generally utilize imaging and laboratory tests to stage cancers– to put it simply, to see how big the cancer is and whether it has actually spread out. The researchers didn’t do this. Rather, they took blood tests to examine nagalase levels, which isn’t a proven method to look for cancer or to see if it has gotten smaller.

Finally, the researchers never tested whether gcmaf really activated macrophages in the clients’ blood. So they couldn’t make sure that the treatment was working at all.

3 physicians from the Anticancer Fund, a not-for-profit group that promotes cancer research study, released a letter in 2014 that laid out a lot of the interest in the research studies. They found several errors in the studies’ claims and stated that its conclusions “make no sense.”.

Future of gcmaf

A few scientists are still investigating gcmaf as a possible cancer treatment. Some early research studies suggest that it may be useful for people with late-stage cancers. It’s hard to understand whether gcmaf works. The studies that have actually been done so far took a look at extremely small numbers of people. Some of them consisted of only one person. Larger studies are needed to prove that this treatment works on cancer and that it’s safe.

Macrophages may still hold promise. Researchers are trying to learn whether monoclonal antibodies or other drugs might assist macrophages eliminate cancer cells.

Until we know more, physicians stick to other immunotherapies, like checkpoint inhibitors, that have more evidence behind them. If you have questions about gcmaf or any other cancer treatment you’ve checked out online, your cancer doctor is the very best person to answer them. (3 ).

Diseases for GcMAF Treatment

GcMAF macrophage activation therapy is useful in the treatment of lots of illness, such as cancer, HIV HELP, Hepatitis B infection (HBV), Liver disease C infection (HCV), Herpes Simplex infection (HSV), Tuberculosis, Pneumonia infection, Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), cystitis/urinary system infection (UTI), Endometriosis, Selective iga shortage disorder and influenza infection.

In healthy individuals the body immune system might be able to get rid of numerous kinds of diseases, nevertheless people with a compromised body immune system will gain from gcmaf therapy.

In the great majority of individuals there are no side-effects with our 2nd generation GcMAF therapy, or side-effects are extremely small and very uncommon. Low grade fever and eczema has actually been observed in about 1 out of 100 clients utilizing gcmaf but these were short-term results.

Treatment in our center has been by Intramuscular (IM), Subcutaneous (SC) and Intramural (IT) injection.

In Mix With Other Treatments gcmaf can be safely used with a wide range of other basic treatments and drugs to enhance their result. We describe this as integrative medicine.

A mix with anti-cancer drugs and radiation therapy (radiotherapy) is possible. For optimal impact and benefit from gcmaf, administer a couple of days apart from chemotherapy. Radiation treatment does not have considerable effects on GcMAF, so both can be utilized together at any time. In our medical experience we have actually observed significant cancer killing results from gcmaf combined with palliative radiotherapy in clients who underwent considerable previous chemotherapy treatment.

Studies show that gcmaf has anti-angiogenic activity in addition to tumor killing activity through the activation of macrophages.

Gcmaf can be integrated with Sonodynamic Therapy (SDT), Photodynamic Treatment (PDT) or both (Sonophotodynamic Therapy, SPDT), Maitake Extract, Coley Vaccine (Coley Fluid), high-dose IV Vitamin C, low dose Naltrexone (LDN), Alpha-Lipoic Acid, hyperthermia treatment, immunotherapies and cancer vaccines (such as autologous cancer vaccine).

Gcmaf needs to be used in combination with at least 5,000 IU vitamin D3 daily. Blood levels of vitamin D are often low in many diseases such as cancer, HIV HELP, etc. Normal vitamin D levels are needed for gcmaf to work completely. Have your blood 25 hydroxy-vitamin D and calcium levels tested. If blood calcium levels end up being elevated, vitamin D3 doses may need to be minimized to attain an ideal balance.

Mixes to Prevent GcMAF can be safely used with a wide array of drugs and other treatments. However, we recommend:.

Very little use of steroids is desirable because of their immune suppressing result, nevertheless steroids may be safely utilized with gcmaf if essential and prescribed by your physician.

Radiation treatment is preferred over chemotherapy whenever possible.

Treatment

Treatment is by intramuscular (IM) or subcutaneous (SC) injection of the gcmaf macrophage activating aspect, 1-2 times weekly (or as prescribed by the dealing with doctor).

Treatment in our center has likewise been by intramural (IT) injection although IM and SC injections are without a doubt the most common technique of administration.

Excellent aseptic handling with ethanol is needed when using the vials. (4 ).

How does GcMAF work?

Gcmaf is a glycoprotein that activates macrophages which in turn increases macrophage activity and transforms them into Natural Killer (NK) cells.

Gcmaf has been medically shown to be largely free of any severe adverse effects. Just flu-like symptoms in couple of portion of those who get the injection. (5 ).

To be more specific:

In a healthy person macrophages in our bloodstream scour our bodies and eliminate malignancies; they get the message to go on the attack from Gc MAF, which is transformed from Gc Protein. However malignant cells like cancer send out an enzyme called Nagalase that stops conversion of Gc protein to Gc MAF (Macrophage Activating Element); so the macrophages never ever get the message to enter into action in this way cancer suppresses the body immune system, and cancer cells grow untreated.

To reverse this we draw out Gc Protein from blood; customize it outside the body to become the missing GcMAF, and inject it when a week for 25 weeks for early cancers, 50 or more weeks for late stage cancers. (Encapsulated tumours require additional treatment.) HIV can need as little as 16 weeks.

In its role of body immune system regulator, gcmaf reverses other diseases that assault the immune system like Osteoporosis, Aids, Hodgkins, Lupus, MS, Fibromyalgia, Parkinsons, different bacterial and viral infections and various kinds of Immune dysfunction.

Little pre-clinical trials to construct the case are again happening.

Those diagnosed with any of these health problems or who are otherwise encouraged of the benefits of gcmaf for their health and who have done their own research on it are welcomed to react. We request a copy of diagnostic info and upgrade reports from a physician during and after treatments, to assist construct the case that gcmaf is a treatment for different health problems, which will assist to make it readily available to the general public. Participants are totally free to stop at any time. (6 ).

A really pertinent GcMAF history

Gcmaf first sprang to internet notoriety in 2015, with an alternate health and conspiracy publication, Natural News, claiming the following.

A particular treatment called gcmaf (short for “Gc protein-derived macrophage triggering factor,” which is a chemically transformed kind of a natural protein that apparently stimulates the activity of a particular kind of white blood cell) “has the potential to be a universal remedy for cancer”.

It didn’t take long for gcmaf to obtain messianic status in the world of online hocus pocus and make-believe medical cures. Natural News continued in the same post;

” [gcmaf] is also thought,” the web site reported, “to be capable of treating and reversing autism, HIV, liver/kidney illness and diabetes.” Rumor has it that gcmaf has the prospective to be a cure for a lot more illness, such as herpes, too.”.

Regardless of the many research short articles released in reputable medical journals (most now retracted) declaring to validate gcmaf as efficient in the treatment of cancers, gcmaf does not cure cancer, or for that matter, any other ailment. It was, and possibly still is, a drug for which there is no clear clinical proof to recommend efficacy for anything. Hints of promise have never ever translated into real outcomes.

How it happened thought about by some as the cure-all for cancer, is another tale completely, and one well worth following. In a 2017 expose by Snopes, capably assisted by the Anticancer Fund (ACF), gcmaf was lastly exposed. In the post, its creator and main supporter, Dr. Nobuto Yamamoto. Was revealed to be guilty of falsifying medical trials in a concerted decades-long effort to offer the lie of gcmaf.

The seriousness and ramifications of Yamamoto’s fraud have widespread implications for the medical community, its publications, and the processes it depends on to verify new medicines. It has actually highlighted how a once-respected member of the medical community can go rogue, utilizing the system’s “fail-safes” against it. The gcmaf legend should not be forgotten. It serves as a long-term tip of unaddressed industry loopholes, most of which remain in place.

The outcome of publishers not removing problematic research study results in yet more documents, based on the theories promoted in the initial disproven research study. Here is a classic example, where 2 of Yamamoto’s papers on gcmaf have been referenced by scientists, in a recent paper entitled “Potential function of gcmaf in suppressing the seriousness of COVID-19-induced immune actions: Lesson gained from HIV”.

Two concerns to the publications involved. Why have you refused to pull back Yamamoto’s incorrect documents and where is the peer review procedure that would identify the research study in the paper referenced above to be flawed? Enabling incorrect and flawed research studies to persist endangers the general public.

You can discover the complete Snopes Article here. Entitled, “How a Retired Researcher’s Doubtful ‘Institute’ Persuaded the Internet That Cancer Was Cured”, it makes for fascinating reading and we advise it as a case study in expertly perpetrated pharmaceutical deceptiveness. Yamamoto had actually taken pleasure in a long and prominent profession till gcmaf, making the motivation for the fraud that much more difficult to figure out, and specialists stay divided on his real motivation.

In November of 2009, Yamamoto effectively offered his patents for gcmaf and related copyright to an Israeli biopharmaceutical business, Efranat Macrophage. The company, after at first welcoming Yamamoto, slowly distanced itself from him, rebranding gcmaf as EFF-022 and going as far as changing the drug’s name mid-trial.

While the medical neighborhood slowly turned their backs on gcmaf, the alternate health and conspiracy sections of the web were far from finished with their new beloved, having seen the marketing and sales potential for this new “wonder” cure. (7 )

” Cancer treated for good?”– GcMAF and the wonder remedy

As an organisation dedicated to beating cancer, we have a deep-rooted interest in any new research study advancements that might cause new, more reliable treatments for the illness.

So when we got a query from an advocate about a post entitled “Cancer cured for good” by Expense Sardi and Timothy Hubbell * we were captivated. The short article discuss research study by Nobuto Yamamoto in the US, taking a look at a protein called GcMAF (aka gcmaf). His published studies appear to reveal that injections of extremely small amounts of GcMAF can “treat” individuals with breast, bowel and prostate cancer.

According to the article, “It works 100% of the time to remove cancer totally, and cancer does not recur even years later on.” Could this be the so-called ‘remedy for cancer’ that we’ve been searching for all these years?

Unfortunately– as with many things in life– if it sounds too excellent to be real it probably is. Significant concerns are now being raised about GcMAF (for instance, this investigation by the BBC) and the companies that offer it, and it is not licensed in the UK to deal with any illness.

Let’s explore a bit more.

What’s the idea behind it?

Dr Yamamoto studies the body immune system– the extremely intricate network of cells that helps to keep us healthy. The cells of the body immune system– white blood cells– battle bacterial and viral infections since they can recognise and assault these ‘foreign’ invaders. But they’re not so good at dealing with cancer, because tumours grow from our own cells and have smart systems to ‘cloak’ them from immune attack.

Macrophages (significance “big eaters” in Greek) are an essential kind of leukocyte. They patrol the body, consuming foreign intruders and dead cells. They likewise help to signal other immune cells to the existence of infections.

Macrophages can be stirred into action by a little sugar-coated protein (glycoprotein) called GcMAF, short for Gc Macrophage Activating Aspect, which is produced by the body. But it’s thought that the production of GcMAF is blocked by an enzyme called Nagalase (alpha-N-acetylgalactosaminidase), produced by numerous cancers. This is among the mechanisms that helps tumours evade the immune system.

Yamamoto’s theory is that injecting cancer clients with GcMAF need to trigger their macrophages to eliminate the cancer. He checked it back in 1997 in a paper published in the journal Cancer Research, showing that injecting GcMAF into mice transplanted with cancer cells could improve their survival from around 16 days to around 35.

But the treatment did not ‘treat’ the cancer, as the cancer cells continued to increase, ultimately killing the animals.

However, there are questions about the science underpinning the concept that GcMAF can treat cancer. For example, other scientists have actually discovered no distinctions in the levels of GcMAF in between cancer patients and healthy people– and the levels they do discover are far higher than the really little dosages proposed to work by Yamamoto. It’s hard to see exactly how this finding fits with the idea of how the treatment is supposed to work, and it does not support the use of GcMAF as a treatment for cancer.

Clinical trials

Fast-forward a couple of years, to the publication of three papers detailing the outcomes of scientific trials of GcMAF performed by Yamamoto, checking the treatment on patients with breast, bowel and prostate cancer.

Note: The breast cancer paper has now been retracted, due to different worry about the work. Read more on the retractionwatch blog site. The bowel cancer paper has likewise now been pulled back. This letter information some of the concerns about the work.

The results seem startling– all the clients on the trials are ‘cured’ of cancer. Definitely this is an incredible breakthrough?

Put bluntly, no it isn’t. There are significant clinical issues with the trials. For a start, all the research studies are extremely small, involving less than twenty clients in each– rather than the thousands required to make the sort of claims mentioned above.

Next, all the clients included had actually gotten basic treatment for their cancer, including surgery, chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy. This is a somewhat unorthodox style for a trial of this kind, due to the fact that it makes it really difficult to tell if any successes are because of the new drug, or the more standard treatments.

On top of this, the scientists didn’t in fact keep track of the development of tumours in the clients, and offer no medical info about them. Instead they decide to measure levels of Nagalase in the blood, rather than looking at any standard established markers for cancer.

For example, when it comes to the breast cancer patients, there is no information about their “TNM” (tumour, node, metastasis) status. This is a basic procedure of how far a patient’s cancer has actually spread out, and is used to compute the probability that it will return.

In addition, the researchers didn’t do any tests to reveal that injected GcMAF was actually triggering macrophages in the clients’ blood, or perhaps operating in the manner in which they expect. There is no info about levels of cytokines– the proteins produced by immune cells when they are triggered– or analysis of the patients’ immune cells.

Perhaps most significantly, there are no controls– neglected patients for contrast– and the studies only followed the clients for a couple of years. We have no chance of informing whether their cancers were growing again, or had been effectively dealt with, and whether this was due to GcMAF or the other treatment they had received.

Considered that 80 percent of all women with breast cancer make it through for a minimum of 5 years, an uncontrolled study revealing that 16 women of unidentified TNM status make it through for a minimum of 4 years is no fantastic shakes, clinically speaking.

Another small research study of 20 patients with a variety of cancers, published in 2013, has similar issues. It’s not a controlled trial, and the scientists just measure nagalase levels as a sign of whether the treatment is ‘working’, and offer really little difficult medical data (such as scans or other recognised tests) about the patients’ actual tumours. For example, in one worrying case, although the researchers revealed that an ovarian cancer patient’s nagalase levels had gone down, the levels of another marker– CA125, which is produced by ovarian cancer cells– had increased. Yet this is classified as an “enhancement” in the paper, with no other supporting info. Overall, this study is also a long way from being convincing evidence that the treatment works.

Additional issues

Another informing point is the kind of journal in which the research was published. If this research was truly cutting-edge, and pointed the way to a treatment for cancer, then the research would likely be found in top-tier ‘high-impact’ medical journals like The Lancet, The New England Journal of Medication or the Journal of the American Medical Association.

And lastly, essentially all the recommendations in the papers are to other documents released by Yamamoto and his group. If GcMAF was certainly an appealing candidate for an effective cancer treatment, you ‘d expect lots of other research to show the exact same thing. Scientists are typically fast to identify promising, emerging fields of research and jump on the bandwagon.

The poor quality of scientific papers supporting gcmaf is talked about here on the Scholarly Open Access blog.

Is there hope?

Although this particular method isn’t all it’s hyped up to be, harnessing the power of body immune system could be a very powerful method to deal with cancer.

And many Cancer Research study UK-funded researchers are likewise operating in this field. For instance, Professor Fran Balkwill and her team are working on ways to fool macrophages and other immune cells into attacking cancer cells.

In 2014, scientists in Israel started a small-scale early-stage clinical trial looking at the dose and safety of gcmaf in cancer patients. (8 ).

Side Effects

Dr Yamamoto states gcmaf does not have side effects. Our experiences agree: gcmaf has shown no negative effects of its own. That’s not surprising– your body anticipates to have it.

However your rebuilt body immune system might sometimes offer you minor negative effects, but bigger adverse effects with late stages of cancer, and periodically serious results with autism, HIV and ME/CFS, as viruses fight back against the rebuilt immune system’s attack.

People’s responses to a reconstructed body immune system are very different– from no, which is typical, to serious in a minority of cases.

Inside 2 hours gcmaf will begin to impact your immune system, and (if your immune system is at least partly active) a shot of 0.1 ml or more may trigger exhaustion which normally lasts 3-4 hours. You may feel much better than usual for the first 2-3 weeks as the body immune system gets up.

Gcmaf is a protein that your body ought to have made by itself, and there is a tiny possibility (under 0.1%) you may have an allergy, usually within the very first 2 hours. If in doubt start with a 0.05 ml dosage, then 0.1 after 12 hours. If you do have a reaction, it can be treated with anti-histamine tablets, which can usually be bought from a chemist without prescription (hay fever is an allergic reaction).

We have seen favorable, but not yet negative autoimmune reactions.

Other small negative effects may consist of cytokine activity (with accompanying fatigue and small weight-loss, no such reports yet), histamine release (with potentially a headache) and the symptoms of a fever (3.5 hours of hot flushes) as the immune system goes to work.

The majority of never notice anything more than an improving sense of well being. (9 ).

Other crucial points

Activating macrophages with High Dosage GcMAF is a fundamental part of any treatment program which can be used alone or in mix with a lot of other therapies.

GcMAF works especially well in synergy with targeted therapies which don’t hurt the immune system. Examples of targeted treatments include hormone treatments, monoclonal antibody drugs, small-molecule drugs, signal transduction inhibitors (HER2 inhibitors, BRAF inhibitors, EGFR inhibitors), angiogenesis inhibitors, immunotherapy drugs (such as drugs that target CTLA-4 protein).

Second Generation GcMAF has the advantage of having no negative effects so treatment should be continued as long as required while disease is present. This is a considerable advantage over lots of standard treatments which have cumulative toxicity that restricts their usage.

GcMAF never ever quits working and will continue to activate macrophages while treatment is continued, either by GcMAF injections and/or oral administration of Colostrum GcMAF. (10 ).

Recommendations

  1. Https://www.healthline.com/health/gcmaf-cancer-treament
  2. Https://thescipub.com/pdf/ajisp.2016.77.82.pdf
  3. Https://www.webmd.com/cancer/guide/gcmaf-cancer-treatment
  4. Https://www.immunotherapy-clinic-ikiru.com/gcmaf/#:~:text=Recommended%20dose%20%E2%80%93%200.25ml%20High,required%20based%20on%20positive%20progress.
  5. Https://www.impianemasmedicalcentre.com/gcmaf-therapy/
  6. Https://www.thebody.com/article/cure-possible
  7. Https://medika.life/gcmaf-a-cancer-cure-con-that-just-refuses-to-die-returns-to-cure-covid/
  8. Https://news.cancerresearchuk.org/2008/12/03/cancer-cured-for-good-GcMAF-and-the-miracle-cure/
  9. Https://gcmaf.eu/gcmaf-products/side-effects/
  10. https://fclinicglobal.com/en/gcmaf-gc-protein-derived-macrophage-activating-factor/
Our Score