One example is discribed here;

http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~lrd/fpephed6.html

I hope the FDA doesn't over step their authority in this, they are there to protect NOT dictate medical opinion. IF they can PROVE it to be such a threat, then so be it.

If DCA was such a threat it would have been controlled long ago!

Just my humble opinion,

RJ

They can suffer neuropathy and they can injure their livers.

But that reasoning makes no sense to me since a great many "offical" approved methods of treating cancer have those same risks and more. One treatment is so dangerous and toxic that it is initiated in the hospital intensive care unit!

Possible neuropathy and liver damage are par for the course with many standard chemotherapies. Radiation can injure or destroy skin, nerves and arteries.

So why is such a fuss being made over people with cancer self-treating with DCA?

Answer: BECAUSE THEY ARE SELF-TREATING, and WITH AN UNPATENTED DRUG NOT BEING SOLD BY ANY DRUG COMPANY, which means that the Cancer Industry LOSES SOME CONTROL and LOSES SOME MONEY. THOSE are the reasons, in my opinion, that such a fuss is being made about people self-treating themselves with DCA.

Though I hope otherwise, I personally do not think DCA is going to turn out to be any miracle drug.

But I certainly DO NOT discourage anyone who properly investigates for themselves the possibility of taking DCA, and who does so cautiously and reasonably, and if possible, under the guidance of a monitoring oncologist or other physician, from doing so.

To sum up: I believe there are plenty of cancer treatments that are as dangerous or more dangerous than DCA, and I believe any furor over the possible dangers of people self-treating with DCA is mostly due to the Cancer Industry---that is, the Drug Companies, the AMA, the NCI and the FDA---losing money and losing control. I therefore see little reason for people who wish to do so in an intelligent, cautious manner, not to try DCA.

As far as DCA being 'dangerous', one only need examine the initial media releases posted on the University of Alberta's website. http://www.depmed.ualberta.ca/dca/media.asp Every single one speaks of how safe DCA is. They are even able to skip clinical trials for toxicity.

When did DCA become 'dangerous'? It was when Dr. Michelekis got word that people were sourcing it, ahead of HIS clinical trials.

Now I read in the paper, that the very people Dr. Michelakis has been trying to prevent from using DCA (the really 'desperate ones') are ineligible for his trials anyway - so what purpose has been served?!

I WONDER HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE DIED BECAUSE THEY COULDN'T ACCESS DCA.

http://www.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news/story.html?id=19249f32-4a06-49cc-a3a8-b7495ae5044e

We are not children. We do not need and do not want the FDA/Big Pharma/NCI/AMA (medical "Big Brother") to tell us what kinds of medicine we can and cannot use.

I would very much like to see an organized, national movement of US citizens come together to oppose what Big Pharma/AMA/NCI/FDA are perpetrating. It truly is time, ESPECIALLY since the kinds of things those organizations are telling us to take for cancer and other degenerative illness work poorly and even cause serious harm.

It truly is time to let those who have set themselves up as highly profitable "Medical Authorities" that we are wise to them and that we aren't going to stand for what they're doing any longer.