I skim-read Albert's interesting post a few days ago with the intention of reading it more completely when I got more time. When I searched for the post again a few days later, I discovered that it had been deleted by the moderator.
I searched for and found Albert's substack page, and have copied the link below for anyone who may be interested.
Yeah they'll come and get you too, and on the same pretext.
by taking down the post, they add credibility to the content.
Marion/Marc ,
Thanks for your comments; with which I concur.
This forum is called “Cure Parkinsons”, a worthy objective that all of the >26,000 members would surely aspire to? But which begs a question for the moderators; are Health Unlocked’s posting rules conducive to actually curing Parkinsons?
Like many PwP I sense that we are not being well served by big Pharma. It seems that their primary objective is to develop patentable molecules that have some efficacy but probably need to be taken on a continuous basis to be effective. They are not a cure but a band-aid to temporarily mask symptoms.
Dr Albert Wright has been a godsend due to his tireless efforts to resolve Parkinson’s. For me, Albert’s broccoli seed tea had reversed my non-motor symptoms markedly. See the chart above, which was created nearly two years ago. My non-motor symptoms have continued to reduce slightly with no contraindications and at an extremely tenable price point. Meanwhile my motor symptoms have got worse…
Not one to rest on his laurels, Albert has turned his attentions to reversing PD motor symptoms too. Once again he has had considerable success and while I have no personal experience of this new protocol, I have every reason to believe him.
If you’re interested in Albert’s work, please follow this link. patientresearcher.com/
I think a spotlight needs to be focused on PD research organisations to try and understand how and why extremely generous donors would contribute well over USD1 billion but have so little to show for it. Perhaps nominating Albert for a Nobel prize in medicine, would send a strong message to the donors? And divert much needed donations to fledgling research organisations that are already delivering impressive results on shoe-string budgets?
well put
Not. Really not well put
Albert for a nobel prize? When he learns to use the right TLA maybe.😂
Time for a fact check
The great martyr's post was not kicked for bad science,
it was not kicked for suggesting that the site's hosts are part of a global conspiracy to earn a living by selling chronic medications and inflicting needless suffering on all of us, who they could easily cure if they wanted to
It was kicked for coming out of the blue with a link to spend money with Albert. Rule 6
"6. This community should not be used for commercial or personal promotion
Please - no selling, no fundraising, no spam. "
That simple. Nothing to do with challenging Big Parma, which he is welcome to discuss here. Just "don't sell stuff"
But, whilst I'm here, let me have a pop at the conspiracy theorists weak logic and consistency
"It seems that their primary objective is to develop patentable molecules that have some efficacy but probably need to be taken on a continuous basis to be effective."
Oh right - so the only legitimate definition of a cure is something which produces a permanent and total resolution in a single intervention ??? Not something you have to take daily like a blood-pressure tablet?
Just like Alberts tea - one dose , or one course, and you are cured for life? Surely Alberts tea
"needs to be taken on a continuous basis to be effective.". But that's OK for Albert, not for Big Pharma's suppressed remedies.
And provides only partial non-motor symptomatic relief - maybe. Or a placebo effect or desperate hope effect. (The trial Bolt_Upright linked to has a completion date of 2023, last post date of 2023, and "recruiting" status.)
Which trial did I link to? I'm just curious. Thanks.
NCT05084365
Fortunately, the Chinese Trial cited above doesn't seem to have started even though the completion date was 2023. If it had, it would have failed because it was designed to measure cognitive function and motor symptoms. The detailed description quotes:
"The primary outcome will be the cognitive function improvement... Secondary outcomes include motor symptoms, biological data, MRI, safety and tolerability." Non-motor symptoms are not mentioned.
As I have stated many times in my publications and posts: Sulforaphane attenuates non-motor symptoms. I have always stated that Motor symptoms are strictly unchanged by BST. This distinction between non-motor and motor symptoms is the most important information that has come out of my research using Broccoli Seed Tea.
These results were published in January 2024 (no link given, no spam).
The problem is that the medical profession is only interested in motor symptoms which as we all know are related to, but not exclusive to, the loss of dopaminergic neurons and a shortage of dopamine in the striatum. Even if sulforaphane could stop the loss progressing, it won't bring back lost neurons and rebuild the neuronal network.
Sulforaphane acts to stimulate the Nrf2 transcription factor, the so-called master regulator of Redox homeostasis. It does this in astrocytes in the brain (astrocytes are the neuron's housekeepers) and epithelial cells in peripheral organs such as the intestines and urinary tract. This results in these cells suffering less OS damage, less inflammation and their damaged mitochondria being replaced by new ones, which in turn make more energy available to the cells concerned. These are all processes which, when left untreated, contribute to neuron loss which is associated with disease progression.
In parallel, Broccoli Seed Tea, which contains sulforaphane, strongly and rapidly attenuates non-motor symptoms. My argument is that non-motor symptoms are associated with the ongoing damage in both neurons and peripheral cells throughout the whole period of the disease (pre- and post-diagnosis). They are the symptoms that we should be monitoring. Any future clinical trials should be designed to stop disease progression by targeting Oxidative Stress in Astrocytes and peripheral organs and the Primary outcome should be non-motor symptoms of Parkinson's, not motor symptoms which are resistant to change. The objective of my blog on Substack will be to inform people about that. People with Parkinson's should be shouting out loud for research to be focused on targets that address that problem and not on re-repackaged levodopa as is now the case.
Thanks Albert
Very informative. I wish you success with your research. I'm waiting on a trial result to be published this month, before getting distracted with PD again. And I am behind with both the day job, and promised glove improvements. (Mrs WTP is not going to be impressed if I don't have a robust system sorted before our trip to the UK at Christmas)
Your plans for clinical trials, and subsequent uptake by PWP would benefit from a scalable Sulforaphane extraction. The tea doesn't lend itself to a double blind placebo controlled study. And it's a bit of a PITA in use too.
I think to suggest stem-cell research, c-abl inhibition, glp1 receptor agonist, vibrotactile gloves, and other research is just repackaged levodopa is a bit unconvincing, and there have been some excellent repackaging of dopamine therapies like duodopa, and the Lille University pump, not to forget things like the INSERM spinal neuro-prosthetic.
But I'm a great believer in the idea that if you turnover enough stones, you'll find the buried treasure, so its good to have another research option. And I'm glad it's working for you
One thing that I firmly believe pharmaceutical companies do, is if they find a natural molecule that may be useful in treating PD, they won't really investigate that molecule. Instead they will try to develop a synthetic patentable molecule instead and test that. An example would be NR, which was really just a patentable version of NA.
Yeah, for sure. Pharma companies are in it to make money. They only invest in what gives them a payback (or might do, at high risk of failure). Ford motor company only make cars they think will sell, and expect to make money doing it. So do Apple, Fender guitars, Harley Davidson bikes and every other business. It is a mystery to me why people confuse commercial pharmaceutical companies with research charities.
But alleging conspiracies which manifestly don't exist and are absurd - alienates potential friends and achieves 5/16 of 11/32 of f*** all.
Lol 😂, the pharmaceutical market it’s not the same as the motorcycle market since the pharmaceutical market is heavily regulated by government agencies that are in fact a protectionist system in favor of pharma.
in Europe or in US it is not possible to buy a drug directly from China if it is not approved by government agencies , even if it is the same thing , because this would cause revenues to collapse but also healthcare spending for the citizens 😊.
These are obvious things that everyone knows.
It is a well-studied system to maintain a de facto monopoly on the pharmaceutical market and set the prices they want.
This monopoly recently also affects the freedom to choose treatments, as doctors are also obliged to prescribe a predefined protocol for the disease for everyone, under penalty of revocation of their license.
Richard,
I don't quibble with big pharma's primary obligation is to the share holders and not the public and don't believe there is a conspiracy afoot, but my question for you is; is our health care best served by companies whose motive is to make money or cure disease?
After 60 years, there has been zero results that do more than mask symptoms, so either the drug companies don't understand PD or are simply not fiancially motivated to solve the problem. I think both.
If big pharma is judged by their performance is serving pwp, they have been an abject failure - whatever the reason.
Marc
Marc
I think it's fairly simple. As Bolt points out in a response to this thread, Parkinsons disease is not easy to fix. The good news is that as the disease becomes more prevalent the financial incentive increases. Which is why there's so much more promising research today than there was 20 years ago. Establishing that the drug companies have no success in treating Parkinson's disease and suggesting that they leave the market and don't bother to try is unlikely to help our cause. But drug companies are only going to do research if it will lead to a profit. If you want purely charitable research into the likes of broccoli tea it's either going to have to be by a government initiative or by a charity. Big Pharma are no more interested than any other public company. But the industry for profit is researching possibilities like Buntanetap which you got so excited about. There's plenty of scope there.
My point was how easily conspiracy theories form and grow. You posted that
"by taking down the post, they add credibility to the content"
they did nothing of the sort. It had nothing to do with the content other than the sales pitch. It was simply enforcing the rule of the forum that Albert was either too lazy too arrogant or too ignorant to follow. Rule six says "no Spam". I don't want spam on this forum and I don't believe you do either. But somehow it became about the conspiracy theory to silence Albert, instead of a simple breach of a good rule
That's how these things spread. "They're eating the cats and dogs in Springfield Ohio. "
Best of luck USA.
Maybe if Albert stopped linking his research to the "Big Pharma want to keep us suffering to keep making money out of us" shit, his research and theories might be taken more seriously. As it is, they are tainted with the moonlanding faked in a studio association.
But, Alberts research is irrelevant to this discussion. NO SPAM.
I understand the intent for rule #6 and preventing SPAM as you noted. Which is sending irrelevant or inappropriate messages to large number of recipients. #6 is to keep this forum clear of junk that clutters discussions. Right? Albert's messages must have been interpreted as being so SPAM-ish and sales- aggressive that it cluttered and disrupted the forum? If that's the case, I can count at least 3 other users' posts that should be removed comparatively speaking to that of Albert's message.
In the past when I have clicked on a link provided by a member of this forum it might take me to a study or even to a youtube channel that might wish to sell me something. This was for the first time a member's link took me to a place where that member was in a manner of speaking selling something. And I have to say, I was taken aback
Right but here the rules are applied based on liking , some people laugh at our expense, then people go elsewhere, donations for research too and so they don't laugh anymore.
We have been left to our own devices for a long time now, at least Wriga tried to do something.
Others just make small talk, and then come here to cherry picking a few words for censor people of good will like Albert for the sake of it.
It was 2018 and 7 years have passed😂:
The thing that complicates comment , is that either I'm going senile, or the links are not the same when I look again. My recollection was a link to a site, where the first thing on the site was a link to a subscription payment. That's SPAM. I also recall a page with maybe half a dozen references to Dopamine Replacement Therapies (DRT) as DRP - and that seems to have gone. I'm not sufficiently interested to investigate further.
"Rule 6. This community should not be used for commercial or personal promotion. Please - no selling, no fundraising, no spam."
That's pretty simple. Nobody wants a shelf full of case law (like "Decisions on golf"). So no exceptions and special cases. Just don't post SPAM
point made and taken
I wonder if eating cats or dogs counts as Keto?😆
No that's geese! 😂
As for the conspiracy theory, imagined the scene at the Pfizer board meeting as the chairman makes the following address
" Anderson in research has come up with a new molecule ABC123 which is a completely safe and non toxic one a day oral tablet, which holds the progress of Parkinsons disease, reverses all symptoms including non-motor, and restores patient experience to Pre Parkinsons diagnosis. Obviously although we have total revenues from Parkinson's disease remedies of $zero, and this molecule is expected to generate new revenues during the 20 year patent period of $1 billion per annum in the U.S. market and $2.5 billion per annum in the global market, we will be suppressing any information about this molecule and ensuring that there are no leaks from the 35 research staff who worked on the project, and not producing or selling it for shareholder profit, because we are committed to protecting the revenues of commodity generic manufacturers"
the reality is that the main Dopamine Replacement Therapy (DRT - not DRP) was Sinemet discovered and launched by Merck Sharp and Dohme (MSD, Merck) more than 50 years ago, and long out of its 20 year patent protection such that most of the manufacturing is not by Big Pharma, but low cost, low margin, low profit, commodity generic manufacturers such as Teva, Sun, Mylan, Amneal, Dr Reddy, Lupin, Sandoz, Aurobindo, Apotex, Torrent and others
Big Pharma is not SMERSH from James Bond, but a number of public companies, responsible to their shareholders for profit, in fierce competition with each other, such as Johnson & Johnson, Abbvie, Novartis, Merck (MSD), Roche, Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Snofi, Eli Lilly etc
Nb MBAnderson the "suppression" (legitimate moderation of forum rules) speaks volumes about - attention to detail, courtesy, and following forum rules, and nothing whatever about adding credibility to the content.
I always think that trying to cure Parkinson's is like trying to stop an apple from decaying while it is inside a sealed jar that you can not open. It's a challenge.
… and as you can see, there are too many objections from people in knowing the truth. This thread is a great example of what happens out there. A person comes forward with a proposed treatment, the validity of which is yet to be established, and immediately there are objections that censor the post without even knowing what it is about. (Yes, because in order to remove a post, it must first be reported by users to the moderators as spam).
An example of an objection is what you say, that is, if the drug is not patentable, no one will finance the research and this eliminates the substances not patentable that remedy the genetic dysfunction.
So in Resercher & Discovery there are too many objections to knowledge and practically there is a priori self-censorship of the research itself, which does not bode well. You could have yours and I could have mine, a vast field which prevents people from observing.
If Parkinson's cure were a completely new thing I'm sure no opinion leader on this forum would notice for this reason.
I am also convinced that soon there will be a very positive turning point, and it will be something that some good researcher will decide to look at without prejudice or partisan interests, will say, “the king is naked “ and we will simply have a cure for Parkinson's, as it has already happened.
Sometimes prejudice is the greatest barrier to knowledge and everyone has their own.
Greetings from Italy, Bolt_Upright .
“Big Pharma is not SMERSH from James Bond, but a number of public companies, responsible to their shareholders for profit, in fierce competition with each other, such as Johnson & Johnson, Abbvie, Novartis, Merck (MSD), Roche, Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Snofi, Eli Lilly etc”. Novo Nordisk
And on which products would they compete fiercely if they all have the same owners or main shareholders like Vanguard Group, BlackRock, State Street Corporation and institutional funds? All of them! Just check and you will see that it is so, this is not confidential information.
Agree with much of what you say winnie, except for the following actual reality: Actually big pharma IS partly smersh... BUT DON'T FORGET ALSO WE HAVE PHARMACY BENEFIT MANAGERS, INTERMEDIARIES THAT ARE EXTREMELY SMERSH... I guess in the UK sort of world you might call them "value adders" ... We have them too but we don't have that very careful political term "value added" no it's pretty much the same here as it is with them) I think the term is entirely ironic and contradictory, except in the sense that an "adder" is also a deadly poisonous snake...That's what makes the world go round after all, value does not grow on trees, somebody has to create it and maximize it because of the great expense required BEFORE it's investment can generate a return justifying the investment that is needed to create it in the first place and must show reasonably presage a sufficient return or it won't be given (gambled) in the first place, because everybody has to eat and you can't eat dirt, you have create real food, so if you hand somebody a huge amount of money this is what it takes, you happen to have a reasonable promise of a return to justifies the investment (gamble with no guarantees), which may never pan out and therefore leave you hungry. Money is like your own blood in that regard. It's actually very hard to do, the money also does not grow on trees, unless somebody has to value it enough to give what they can produce an access and exchange for what they can get for that money that matters in their actual life, and that does not come from governments or fiat as much as it comes from the promise of getting that stuff back and then the experience of getting that stuff I exchange for money you give out for it when you give up that money to somebody else. In our situation or example here today that we are discussing, one very important tool which we didn't mention just yet, is Big Pharma companies buy up generic manufacturers because what they then can do is increase the price for generics until the generic is almost but not quite as high as the brand, because drawings apply the market will therefore bear it, and that is indeed what happens if you observe. You need to understand something about mercantile capitalism, that has in fact happened if you do a little studying, all about it is commonplace on the larger general principal of "catch and kill" or the principal of concentrating by controlling and limiting supply until then highest price that equilibriates supply and demand, that it is extremely flexible and brilliant and it's part of the Best of the Best March towards goal, which is not cure, it is maximizing long-term shareholder/investor {read large investment funds and corporations} profitability for shareholders, it's particular business happens to be in pharmaceuticals but is true about every business, and believe me, everything IS a business, even government...and there is plenty of experience that buying a competitor is also part of mercantile capitalism, because of your restrict supply your profitability goes up and that is one of the oldest principles in the book and it happens today because it works so well. So not only SMERSH, but SPECTRE too. CURE IS NOT PROFITABLE, WHILST DISEASE MANAGEMENT IS.
.
There's a perfect example I saw yet just today, about a product called Meibo, some other name in the UK and Australia New Zealand and Europe, helps keep eye moisture from evaporating, and is a "first in class" product (a fluorinated six fluorine hydrocarbon with a hexane I think), which I guess works by the very powerfully bonded fluorines keeping half of the otherwise hydrogenated carbons from dehydrating, about thus helping keeping dry eyes moisture from evaporating... kind of a teflon for your eyes when you think about it). Imagine putting Teflon in your eyes. In Australia the product is over the counter, thus also in New Zealand, much more socialized in their medical mercantile industries process, cost is about $34 NZ and €30 EU for a month... Whereas in the US is controlled by prescription, and the base cost is $1,237 US dollars (about 1170-1250 euros...wikipedia) for the same 1 month bottle, and no generics allowed... {But eventually when they are, in the US at least those generics will find eventual price to be about 90 % of brand...my observation of a couple of actual cases}.
🙂
My original post was not intended to "tigger" (sorry WinnieThePooh) anyone or score points. It was to direct people to Albert, who virtually singlehandedly, developed a remedy that has done more to help ease my Parkinson's symptoms than any drug/remedy/diet/supplement. None of you can argue with this statement.
Much of my career was devoted to continuous improvement but a key part of CI is root cause analysis. If you don't know or aren't focused on root causes, then any improvement realised is a fluke. Albert's post above demonstrates a clear understanding of PD root causes and how the active ingredient in BST eases specific symptoms. Out interest, while I take the tea regularly, one person hasn't done for about 2 years but claims they are still seeing benefits.
To be fair, big Pharma does develop drugs to cure disease. But when it comes to PD they appear to treat it like a headache! ~60 years ago they developed a better Aspirin for PD called Carbolevadopa. Since then various agonists, slow release iterations etc have come along but they are still only temporarily dealing with the headache. The larger PD research organisations seem to follow the same model?
I was wrong regarding PD research funding. It is now up to >USD2 Billion. If 1% of this (USD20 Million) was diverted to the right parties, I firmly believe that there would be effective PD motor and non motor symptom reversing modalities available within 2 - 3 years.
These small research organisations tend to be staffed with people who have PD. Individuals who are not motivated by profits but continuously reminded by their symptoms that they are doing it to ease the misery of millions.
While I have some specific ideas as to how we might progress, I would rather leave it to y'all to have your say first...
Visit to Parkinsons Physiotherapist
RESTORE/MAGIC DIRT
Vitamin B1 : Thiamine vs. Benfotiamine 
