Aa
Aa
A
A
A
Close
Is anyone familiar with treatment using LDN? Is this stuff for real?
61 Responses
Sort by: Helpful Oldest Newest
Avatar universal
Dating back to 1972 and they still haven't introduced it as part of SOC.  Where are the studies regarding reversal of fibrosis and damage specifically attributed to the hepc virus?
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
months, with favorable effects on the usual
enzyme indicators of liver damage.
In summary, the experiences from the
clinical trials discussed above concur with
findings from others36-40 to paint a clear pic-
ture of PC as an effective and safe nutrient for
liver damage of all degrees of severity.
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
Here's the next chapter:

Controlled Trials with PC Against
Severe Liver Damage

This category of liver damage is char-
acterized by extensive fibrosis, which effec-
tively stifles whole zones of the liver.  Some-
times aggressive inflammatory changes are
also present.  This stage can be reached as a
consequence of persistent alcohol intake, per-
sistent viral infection, or the unchecked toxic
effects of any of the many other agents that
can damage the liver.  Given the severity of
the structural and functional damage to the
liver at this stage, lesser benefits are to be ex-
pected from PC supplementation than at ear-
lier stages. Yet still PC proved beneficial.
Fassati and collaborators in 1981 in a
controlled trial conducted in Prague, Czecho-
slovakia, studied 61 subjects with moderately
severe to severe functional breakdown of the
liver.33  The degree of advanced liver damage
(extensive fibrosis, inflammation, elevated en-
zymes) was assessed by biopsy and by a wide
range of blood biochemical tests.  Thirty-four
(34) subjects were given fortified PC (900 mg
per day), and 27 subjects served as controls.
The trial ran for 4 months, with each patient
serving as their own control for statistical
analysis.
Biochemical re-testing conducted at
the end of the trial showed that except for the
bilirubin values, all the other biochemical in-
dicators were significantly improved (p<0.01).
These included the albumin/globulin ratio, al-
bumin, bromsulfalein (BSP) clearance, SGPT,
and SGOT. The number of subjects positive
for HBsAg in the blood moved from 8 of 34
to 3 of 34 in the PC group; that of the controls
moved from 7 of  27 to 6 of 27. The trend
apparent in the PC group was not statistically
significant due to the small numbers of
HBsAg-positive subjects in both groups from
the beginning of the trial. The investigators
commented that fortified PC was the only in-
tervention they were aware of that seemed to
bring down viral antigen levels, and they urged
further investigation of this possible benefit
with larger groups of subjects.
In 1991, Ilic and Begic-Janev con-
ducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-
controlled trial.34  They recruited 50 subjects,
all positive for HBsAg (hepatitis B virus anti-
gen) who had extremely severe liver damage
as verified by biopsy and immunologic test-
ing.  The test group was administered 1350
mg of fortified PC, and the control group re-
ceived a placebo.  Both groups were followed
for 1 year, with periodic sampling for lab as-
sessments, then at the end of the 12 months
they were biopsied again.
After 12 months the subjects given PC
had experienced considerably greater benefit,
as assessed both from the structural biopsy
findings and from the lab findings (p <0.001).
Among the PC group, 20 of 25 were judged
good to moderately good, versus 6 of 25 be-
ing moderately improved in the placebo group.
Six of the 25 in the PC group also lost the
HBsAg viral antigen, versus only 3 of 25 for
the placebo group.  Such “seroconversion”
indicated marked clinical improvement for
these fortunate subjects.  A number of cell-
structural, biochemical, immunologic, and
hematologic parameters were significantly
improved in the PC group as compared with
the placebo group.  Improvement in the PC
group continued well past the end of the trial.
As a rule, researchers working with
such severely affected subjects obtained bet-
ter results by maintaining the subjects on com-
bined intravenous PC and oral supplementa-
tion until substantial improvement had begun.
Other trials with severe liver damage,
though not controlled, are worthy of note.
Wallnoefer and Hanusch in their pioneering
study administered PC both intravenously and
orally to 130 subjects with advanced, fibrotic
liver damage.7 Once the clinical indicators
began returning to normal, they switched to
purely oral administration at relatively low
intakes (450-700 mg), which was continued
for months to years as necessary.  PC produced
benefits for 17.5% of these subjects, as con-
firmed from normalized enzyme levels and
improved tissue structure on biopsy.  Using a
similar strategy, they achieved benefit for 35.3
percent of their subjects with chronic viral in-
fection of a kind that was positive for viral
antigen and has an aggressive tendency to
progress to severe liver damage.  Kuntz re-
ported in 1989 on 10 subjects to whom he gave
PC intravenously at 2,800 mg per day.3  Im-
provements were seen as early as the seventh
day, and at the end of the 28-day trial period 3
subjects showed “dramatic, life-saving” im-
provement, 2 had “increasingly rapid improve-
ment,” 2 had gradual improvement, 2 had no
change; and 1 of the 10 subjects had died.
Kalab and Cervinka worked with 30
subjects who had advanced liver damage for
which pharmaceutical treatments had failed.35
Orally administered fortified PC (1350 mg
daily) produced clinical improvement after 6
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
Sure, Mike no problem,

Alternative Medicine Review, Volume 1, Number 4, 1996

(PC stands for phosphatidylcholine)

This chapter is in regards to viral liver damage. I will also post the next chapter regarding severe liver damage;

Controlled Trials with PC in Viral
Liver Damage

A number of viruses can damage the
liver, by precipitating widespread inflamma-
tory breakdown which is further complicated
by overactivation of the immune system (au-
toimmune complications).  Once successfully
installed in the liver parenchyma, such viruses
can become chronic and very hard to dislodge.
Liver viruses (here simply called LV) can
wreak havoc with the liver’s functions.  Medi-
cal weapons for eliminating LV from the liver,
or for ameliorating their progressive damage,
have been limited.  Controlled clinical trials
have unequivocally established PC as safe and
reliable nutritional support for the liver against
the damage initiated by LV.
Mueting and collaborators in 1972
gave 16 subjects with chronic, aggressive LV
a relatively high intake of PC (2,050 mg per
day) for an average 8 months.26     A number
of clinical parameters improved, including
measures of the liver’s detoxification pathways
that metabolize amino acids and phenols, and
the authors concluded that PC was having a
“normalizing” effect on the liver as a whole.
From their large open study reported in 1973,
over the course of which some subjects re-
ceived PC for up to 5 years, Wallnoefer and
Hanusch noted a success rate for chronic, ag-
gressive LV infection of 35.3 percent.7
Hirayama, Yano and collaborators con-
ducted a double-blind trial in Japan in 1978,
using 124 subjects with various LV.27,28  They
gave PC (1350 mg per day) to a group of 58
subjects and placebo to 66 subjects, for twelve
weeks.  The PC group experienced significant
reductions in SGOT and SGPT levels when
compared with the placebo group; those with
higher enzyme values to begin with appeared
to benefit the most.  A subsequent blinded bi-
opsy assessment after 6 months confirmed that
in the PC subjects, the liver parenchymal tis-
sue had partially recovered from its earlier
damage; focal necrosis/cell death was lessened
in the PC group, and these subjects showed
signs of liver regeneration.
In 1981, Kosina and collaborators con-
ducted a sophisticated trial in Czechoslova-
kia that compared PC against drugs for the
management of viral-related liver inflamma-
tion.  They recruited 80 subjects with pre-
sumed acute LV infection (viruses hepatitis A
and hepatitis B), and divided them into four
groups of  20 subjects each.29 The first 2
groups were drawn from subjects whose bi-
lirubin levels were low (below 250 micro-
moles per liter) and were judged “moderately
serious.”  Subjects in Group I were adminis-
tered fortified PC (1350 mg) along with the
“standard treatment” that involved diet, rest,
vitamins, and glucose; Group II received the
standard treatment only.  Groups III and IV
were judged “serious,” with bilirubin levels
above 250 micromoles per liter.  Group III
received fortified PC and 580 mg daily of the
immunosuppressive drug prednisone (a drug
option for the suspected immune system
overactivation from LV); Group IV received
prednisone plus the standard treatment.
PC had a clearly favorable effect in this
trial.  Concerning the resolution of viral dam-
age, both Group I subjects (less severe) and
Group III (more severe) had their liver tests
return to normal markedly faster than the cor-
responding groups that did not receive PC.
Subjects who did not receive PC were more
likely to relapse (10% in the less severe, 25%
in the severe), while no relapses occurred in
the PC groups.  Upset stomach, jaundice, and
liver swelling, as well as the lab tests, all re-
solved faster in the groups treated with PC.
There was a trend towards lower occurrence
of the hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) in
the PC groups as treatment progressed.
Jenkins and collaborators at King’s
College, London did a double-blind trial in
1982 on 30 subjects with progressing liverdamage from chronic LV (hepatitis B virus,
negative for HBsAg), as verified by biopsy.30
They randomly divided the subjects into two
groups of 15 each, kept them on the standard
immunosuppressive therapy (prednisolone or
azathioprine), then gave one group PC (2,300
mg per day) and the other placebo, for 1 year.
At the end of this period, the group given PC
had no clinical changes, while the placebo
(control) group had worsened.  Biopsies re-
vealed significant improvement of the liver
structure in the PC group, versus no improve-
ment for the controls.  More of the PC sub-
jects reported improved well-being than did
the controls (62% versus 43%).  In 3 of the 15
subjects given PC the viral infection was
judged to be inactive at the end of the trial,
while no subjects were judged inactive from
the placebo group.  Thus in this small con-
trolled trial, PC halted and partly reversed
chronic LV damage, improved overall well-
being, and “turned off” the virus in as many as
20% of the subjects.
In 1985, Visco and collaborators as-
sembled 60 subjects who were positive for
hepatitis B virus (assessed as presence of
HBsAg) and who had acute LV liver damage,
and divided them into two groups.31  Within
10 days from the onset of jaundice, on a
double-blind basis the subjects were started on
either fortified PC (1350 mg) or placebo cap-
sules.  Lab tests were conducted frequently,
and immune evaluations and clinical exams
were done at 30, 90, and 180 days (6 months,
end of trial).
By the 30-day mark, the group given
PC was significantly more improved than the
placebo group, with 50% being negative for
HBsAg versus 25% for the controls (p<0.05).
PC improved the rate of clearance of virus
antigen from the blood. The immune param-
eters were not significantly different, though
liver enzyme tests showed trends favoring PC.
In 1990, Hantak and collaborators in
Yugoslavia used PC to manage 24 subjects
with LV (hepatitis B virus).32  All the subjects
were chronically infected—they all had been
virus carriers for at least 6 months.  Seven had
viral antigens (HBeAg) which indicated a rela-
tively high degree of active infection.  The
other 17 subjects had no viral antigens and had
antibodies to the virus (anti-HBeAg), indicat-
ing that they were in a stage of relative viral
inactivity.  All subjects received  900 mg of
fortified PC per day.  After 4 months, the less
severely affected, antibody-positive subgroup
showed statistically significant improvements
in SGOT, SGPT, albumins, gamma-globulins,
and other biochemical measures.  The sub-
group that began the study with active virus
had statistically significant improvements in
immune measures, suggestive of clinical ben-
efit from PC.  The effects of PC in this small
and not well controlled trial were judged en-
couraging, and might have been more dramatic
had the daily intake been as high as in other
trials (a minimum 1350 mg of fortified PC,
rather than the 900 mg that was given).
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
I am still waiting for you to post a reputable study showing even just one HCV patient with documented improved histology who is not SVR.
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
Check out the stem enchance....I HAVE...ive been on it for 2 years before i started my current SOC
Helpful - 0
Have an Answer?

You are reading content posted in the Hepatitis C Community

Top Hepatitis Answerers
317787 tn?1473358451
DC
683231 tn?1467323017
Auburn, WA
Learn About Top Answerers
Didn't find the answer you were looking for?
Ask a question
Answer a few simple questions about your Hep C treatment journey.

Those who qualify may receive up to $100 for their time.
Explore More In Our Hep C Learning Center
image description
Learn about this treatable virus.
image description
Getting tested for this viral infection.
image description
3 key steps to getting on treatment.
image description
4 steps to getting on therapy.
image description
What you need to know about Hep C drugs.
image description
How the drugs might affect you.
image description
These tips may up your chances of a cure.
Popular Resources
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
STIs are the most common cause of genital sores.
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.