Want to reduce your viral load.?

[T246]

Anyone else have the success that I have.?.

I was diagnosed in Feb 2, 09.  I use a great holistic Dr is west Los Angeles, Joe Sciabbarrasi.  He, in fact found the HCV, not my GP.  I fired my GP, needless to say.

While I was waiting for biopsy Dr Sciabbarrasi had me do the following.

1.        Weekly, or every 10 days intravenous infusions of pharmaceutical purity hydrogen peroxide.  These are significantly diluted in sterile water for administration.
2.       Intravenous infusions of glutathione and alpha lipoic acid run after each hydrogen peroxide infusion.
3.       Oral supplements to support liver healing and detoxification
4.       Self care, which is extremely important, including exercise, a healthy diet (organic as much as possible), drinking 8 to 10 16 oz glasses of water per day, no alcohol, social contacts and your own inner work (be that prayer, meditation, guided imagery, etc).  Reducing stress is always an important part of healing.

I did this for 5 weeks and my hep Dr ran labs.  My load went from 1.79 MM to 271,000.

I am moving ahead with traditional treatment shortly, but many studies point to this:
HCV genotype 1 patients with low baseline HCV RNA defined as 600,000 IU/mL or less also noted benefit of attaining a higher % RVR and SVR from Peg, Co-Peg treatment.  I will spare more details, you most likely already know them.

This is by no means a replacement, or cure, but It cannot hurt.  
FYI, I also lost 8% of my body wait through diet during this time, it all helps.
Many that do not believe in Peg, Co Peg treatment may want to try this as well.

Sciabbarrasi's phone # [phone].  Tell him you read this on this site.

This site is great, thank to you all for helping me.


310-268-8466

[Willy50]

I don't and can't be in the position of defending this treatment since I'm not up on the regimen or know much about it.

HOWEVER....from reading the thread it was very clear that the solution was dilute and that it was IV; not per the link you provided.

I'm content to let thread evolve.  It may be unfounded.

I think I can point out many threads in which any number of alternatives have been slighted saying that they don't work.  Even so it seems that recently in this spring EASL there have been positive studies presented on SAM-e and IV milk thistle.

I don't know the answer but I'm sure that anyone could provide a link or two which proves them to be worthless.

My major point is that by remaining open we may learn more than when we chase people away.  If nothing else we refine our arguments.  ; )

best,
Willy

[jmjm530]

First of all the person did not lower pre-treatment viral load by his own account. The drop was less than one-log which can be more than covered by testing variance. Source: Mitchel Friedman at CCOptions Web Site. Beyond that,  we already have established dangers (see links by Bill and myself) with no stated benefits other than anecdotal which for all we know may be someone not even treating but promoting a web site that sells the stuff. So where I come out is "blitzkreig" because someone may read this and think "wow", maybe I should try this stuff and pick up the phone and call the phone number so thoughtfully provider by the poster in the first post of this thread.

[Willy50]

I am not enamored with the treatment itself but am interested in any means or the best means at one might lower viral load pre-treatment.  This may or may not prove to be of use but I'm not aware of many studies that have attempted to do this; I'm just curious.

I've also tried not to endorse the product.  I am in favor of such odd ducks finding some refuge in forums.  If they succeed we learn something.  IF they fail we learn something and actually have a result to warn people of next time it comes up.  I don't think that tolerance or openness = encouragement.

So far as past trials/ threads I think that I would distinguish expecting someone to do hydrogen peroxide therapy thinking they could never have to treat *versus* someone who had the intention of doing a short course of (whatever type of therapy one would choose) an alternative in order to lower the viral load and then treat w/ SOC  

Once again; I don't think that I'm endorsing or encouraging.  This person already did this treatment.  I just want to hear how the story ends.  It could be that through keeping communication open we may see T246 treat lets say in a month and then perhaps a 4 week PCR.  So in a bit more than 2 months we might have an interesting outcome to discuss.  That may weigh a lot more than us "theo'risin" .  

I'm just interested and don't see that much harm in keeping this open.

OR...... we can blitzkreig any such posts of course.  ; )

best,
Willy

[jmjm530]

From Sloane Kettering:
-----------------
DA Warns about Use of High-Strength Hydrogen Peroxide Products

August 8, 2006

The FDA has issued a warning about use of high-strength hydrogen peroxide products, including 35 percent Food Grade Hydrogen Peroxide. The letter states that consumption of hydrogen peroxide products for medicinal purposes can be harmful and fatal and it advises consumers to stop taking such products immediately.

The FDA also sent warning letters to two firms that sell 35 percent hydrogen peroxide products on Web sites under false claims of treating AIDS, cancers, emphysema, and other diseases.

Hydrogen peroxide is often consumed orally by cancer patients as a form of alternative therapy.
http://www.mskcc.org/mskcc/html/69731.cfm
-------------------------------

(From Cancer.Org)
Overview

Available scientific evidence does not support claims that putting oxygen-releasing chemicals into a person's body is effective in treating cancer. It may even be dangerous. There have been reports of patient deaths from this method.

How is it promoted for use?

Different varieties of oxygen therapy are promoted as alternative treatments for dozens of diseases, including certain types of cancer, asthma, emphysema, AIDS, arthritis, heart and vascular diseases, multiple sclerosis, and Alzheimer’s disease.

Some supporters claim that cancer cells thrive in low-oxygen environments. They believe adding oxygen to the body creates an oxygen-rich condition in which cancer cells cannot survive. Supporters of this type of treatment claim that it increases the efficiency of all cells in the body and increases energy, promotes the production of antioxidants, and enhances the immune system.

http://www.cancer.org/docroot/ETO/content/ETO_5_3X_Oxygen_Therapy.asp?sitearea=ETO&viewmode=print&

From "the body" related on Ozone Therapy

Dr. Frasino: 1. How can it be said that ozone therapy is a fraud? Easy. I just open my mouth and say (or flex my fingers and type), "OZONE IS A FRAUD." See, it's as easy as that. It's also the truth.

http://www.thebody.com/Forums/AIDS/SafeSex/Archive/Hepatitis/Q198201.html

[Willy50]

"Since this lower starting viral load was artificially induced, who is to say it will yield the same response as a naturally occurring immune response low starting viral load. "
==============================================
Who is to say?   Not me.  

I think intuitively one knows that it is usually easier to get to undetectable from, lets say 75,000ml/IU than from over 10 million.  I can think of one Vertex lab rat who was about 27,000,000; that is a decent difference in base line log.  We also sometimes see response rates stall right about where people clear.  This could be due in part to resistance issues.  If one was able to overcome the virii with the initial attack one might simply clear and stay clear.  It's the slower response curves that are known more for rebound or relapse.  I'd be more likely to guess that a starting low viral load would be of benefit, all things remaining the same.  The slower curve could also be due to low RBC or WBC or other lab values which tank during TX.

We don't know if all things DO remain the same though.  What if the alternative therapy harms the body or immune response?  I mentioned that possibility in my first post in this thread.  

Anyway; the Milk thistle IV might also be a decent way to go and achieve some sort of comparable results.  Maybe some external method of lowering VL won't work but it looks as if it could to me.

best,
Willy

[jmjm530]

Apache: This goes against many many studies that say RVR is the most important prognostic factor, not low VL. Has this changed, or is this a difference in expert opinion, or expert a different conclusion.
-------
Two different animals and one does not contradict the other.

Low pre-treatment viral load is a *pre-treatment* predictor of SVR. RVR is also a predictor of SVR, but of course, not pre-treatment.

Once treatment begins,  RVR will trump most pre-treatment predictors including viral load,  but of course we don't have the advantage of knowing that when we start treatment.

Willy,

I think we have to be very cautious endorsing (or let's say not slamming LOL) some potentially dangerous treatments in let's say the "quack" category if we only have anecdotal data to support it but scientific data to support the dangers. Can't say I'm positive that fits here but seems to at least at first glance of the links "bill" posted earlier in the thread. Hydrogen Peroxide has been around for a long time as a quack cure for all sorts of things and will be glad to even data a Peroxide Blonde if proven wrong.

- Jim