The Gilgamesh Project
With multiple awards to his name for cancer research, this childhood prodigy
was silenced when his forbidden science began closing in on the secret of eternal
life.
by Andrew Sokar, 2005
Email: slowsubversion@yahoo.com
The ability to deal effectively with diseases such as cancer and the consequences
of the ageing process remains one of the last major challenges for biomedical
science. In order to meet this challenge, it is pivotal that we understand the
underlying mechanisms for the cell growth cycle, i.e. why cells grow and divide,
why they undergo a process known as differentiation (why and how identical embryonic
cells become mature liver, skin, brain cells, etc.) and why, ultimately, cells
lapse into senescence and die—causing the metabolic decline and death of
the organism.
Problems such as these have obsessed me since childhood and have fired a passionate
interest in chemistry and biology long before I enrolled in my first college
chemistry course. Considering the extreme human, social and economic costs of
diseases such as cancer, heart disease and illnesses associated with advancing
age, I could be forgiven for thinking during my high school years that a career
devoted to solving these problems was the noblest pursuit possible. If someone
had told me that vested interests did not want solutions to these most pressing
of medical problems, I would have considered them a delusional conspiracy nut.
However, my experiences have me permanently disabused of this notion.
In this article, I wish to relate the incredible odyssey that has been my life
and some details of the medical research that I have undertaken. I believe that
this research, if taken to its logical conclusion, stands a good chance of yielding
non-toxic treatments for various forms of cancer and also for prolonging the
human life span—possibly indefinitely. Instead of being lauded for these
achievements, I have had my education and career in the medical sciences derailed
and my life essentially ruined.
There are many lessons to be learned from my experiences that would be worthy
of a Hollywood thriller. The first is just how precariously close we stand to
bringing the fountain of youth out of the realm of mythology and into the laboratory
and ultimately, the clinic—the clues to this endeavour being provided by
some of the lowliest (and annoying) organisms on earth. The second lesson is
just how committed the medical (and possibly political) establishments are to
preventing this from happening and lastly, how deeply the tentacles of vested
interests (both personal and institutional) penetrate the hearts and minds of
many doctors, administrators and medical educators and function to beat down
any type of non-conformist creativity which challenges the status quo.
THE EARLY YEARS
I live in the Midwestern United States where I also grew up and received my
education. I currently possess a Bachelor of Science, majoring in biology, and
hold a master's degree in political science/international trade. While my classmates
in high school were attending ball games and doing what other high schoolers
do, I was performing synthetic organic chemistry in a makeshift lab in my home.
Developing novel non-toxic agricultural chemicals for the control of pests was
my initial preoccupation. Later I became interested in creating non-toxic modalities
for the treatment of cancer. These interests were shaped by an unconventional
junior high school biology teacher who encouraged in vivo experimentation (apologies
to anti-vivisectionist readers) and pressed students to do independent research
to solve medical problems.
It was during my high school years that I entered and won virtually every science
fair with the various projects that I was undertaking. During my senior year,
I won first place in my state science fair and received the state medical association's
certification of distinction for designing novel classes of antineoplastics
(anti-cancer drugs). I was published professionally, received the American Chemical
Society Award, my city's Engineering and Scientific Society award and was inducted
into my state's Academy of Science as well as into the New York Academy of Sciences
and the American Association for the Advancement of Science before graduating
from high school.
In college I continued in my pursuits to unravel the mysteries of how cancer
cells develop and metastasise. As it was unusual for undergraduate students
to develop and run their own projects, I was fortunate to work with faculty
members in my biology and chemistry departments who gave me free run of their
facilities. This research led to the development of new classes of compounds
which could almost completely block invasion (the process by which cancer cells
migrate into healthy tissue). These compounds were essentially non-toxic. I
obtained funding for this research through a local oncologist and his hospital,
as well as from my university's foundation. My research was featured on local
television and in newspapers and I received several accolades, including the
Who's Who Among Students in American Universities and Colleges Award. Thus,
upon receiving my bachelor's degree I had every reason to suspect a successful
passage through medical school and a productive career in medical research.
Upon entering medical school, I again had the fortune of working with a faculty
member who understood the potential of my work and gave me any assistance that
he could render. I was funded by my oncologist acquaintance as well as through
grant money from the American Cancer Society and other government-funded organisations.
I became steadily more engrossed in the mysteries of the cell growth cycle and
continued synthesising novel classes of cell growth regulators that eventually
led me to develop an entirely new perspective on such issues as the human life
span, cancer and other illnesses that my medical school professors were presenting
as unrelated phenomena. I now present this work in an abbreviated form to facilitate
understanding by readers without biomedical backgrounds.
UNRAVELLING THE MYSTERIES OF THE AGES
Although the stages of the cell growth cycle and the cellular and histological
transformations that accompany them are fairly well-known to medical science,
the biochemical mechanisms that bring these changes about are poorly defined
at best. This is why current therapies for disease states which entail rapid
and uncontrolled cell division (such as cancer), consist mainly of poisoning
the offending cells with toxic drugs (chemotherapy), radiation (radiotherapy),
or removing them through surgery.
Our understanding of the underlying mechanisms for the ageing process leaves
even more to be desired. We have virtually no therapies today that can effectively
halt or even slow the vaunted biological clock. All we can hope to do is to
cover up the signs of ageing through various cosmetic modalities and to treat
various age-related maladies (arteriosclerosis, heart disease, etc.,) with therapeutic
regimens which address symptoms rather than ultimate causes.
To anyone who has had to care for patients afflicted with the debilitating
sequelae of ageing or the horrendous consequences of life-threatening cancers,
this is a wholly unsatisfactory state of affairs that cries out for new insights
and approaches.
Anyone who identifies the precise factors that regulate what cells do at specific
points in the cell growth cycle will have achieved a quantum leap in our understanding
not only of the genesis of cancer but also of the age-old question concerning
why animals, including humans, age and ultimately die. Such knowledge will not
only enable medical science to safely and effectively treat many disease states
which today remain enigmatic, but also has profound ramifications for the cosmetic
industry.
CURRENT STATE OF LONGEVITY RESEARCH
In order to overcome the limitations of current orthodoxies regarding cell
growth and differentiation, it is necessary to briefly review what those orthodoxies
are. Within the appropriate body of scholarship dealing with these issues, there
have been two basic schools of thought as to what causes cell senescence, cell
death and the dysfunctions associated with neoplastic disease (e.g. cancer).
The currently dominant one is the free-radical approach.
Reduced to its most basic form, this view holds that cellular dysfunctions,
which lead to cancer as well as ageing and eventual cell death, are caused by
the destructive action of environmental free radicals upon various important
cellular components such as DNA. In this fatalistic view, ageing can be understood
as an irreversible and inevitable accumulation of cellular damage. It is my
belief that this view is at least partially wrong.
I was once told that research into prolonging the human life span was futile
because "every living thing has to grow old and die". Yet, this fatalistic
generalisation is patently untrue. Many unicellular organisms are effectively
immortal and reproduce by dividing indefinitely, only succumbing to environmental
catastrophes—such as the Clorox bleach in your washing machine.
Likewise, there are multicellular organisms for which the concept of growing
old is meaningless. Giant sequoia trees can be thousands of years old—yet
keep on growing and producing vigorous and functional leaves and internal structures
such as xylem and phloem year after year—being felled only by lightning
strikes or chain saws. Certain crustaceans such as lobsters grow bigger but
do not manifest the age-related declines in reflexes and physiological parameters
that plague humans and other animals.
Entomologists have long known that hormonal manipulation can prevent metamorphosis
and keep insects in the juvenile state indefinitely. This knowledge has formed
the basis for insecticide design.
Likewise, hormonal cues control the development of plants by affecting the
proliferation and differentiation of plant cells. Auxin-class herbicides, such
as the ubiquitous 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) have been used for
eradicating dandelions from lawns for decades. These substances cause discordant
cell growth and differentiation which leads to fatal morphological changes and
physiological dysfunctions. Considering how important such hormonal systems
are to the survival of such a diverse group of organisms, I reasoned that mammals
possess systems (even if in a vestigial state) which are functionally analogous,
even if the specific chemistry may differ.
A second approach to understanding ageing holds that cell growth, differentiation,
ageing and death are not the sole result of accumulated cellular damage or of
some unstoppable biological clock which resides exclusively within cells, but
that these are instead hormonally mediated phenomena which result from the interaction
of a cell's genes with chemical substances present in the extracellular matrix
and produced in remote locations in the body.
This theory is supported by various lines of converging evidence, including
research done on the rare disease progeria, a syndrome in which various endocrine
glands malfunction and the victim rapidly ages and usually dies before the chronological
age of twenty.
This devastating and poorly understood disease strongly indicates that the
biological clock can be reset and speeded-up, and that this speeding up is associated
with the failure of the pineal gland (a pea-sized gland which lies at the centre
of the brain), as well as the entire hypothalamic-pituitary axis. The failure
of these glands to secrete vital hormones then causes the degenerative changes
throughout the body commonly associated with ageing, only much sooner than in
healthy individuals who lack the particular genetic defects associated with
progeria.
My own research, both in the library and the laboratory, has led me to gradually
put such observations together with findings from other lines of investigation.
For instance, it is now acknowledged that the hormone melatonin—secreted
by the pineal gland—plays a role not only in the regulation of the sleep-wake
cycle, but also in prolonging life span and in some cases, halting and even
reversing some of the symptoms of ageing in laboratory animals and humans. The
hormone also has anti-cancer activity. Such research, mostly performed in Europe,
is amply cited in Dr Walter Pierpaoli's 1995 bestseller The Melatonin Miracle,
and need not be dealt with in depth here.1
Since melatonin is already a commonly sold health supplement, it cannot be
patented by pharmaceutical companies and consequently has marshalled little
interest from the medical establishment, at least on this side of the Atlantic.
However, this is irrelevant from the perspective of my own. I believe that melatonin
is an important, but relatively small piece of the overall puzzle and my work
has taken this line of research beyond Dr Pierpaoli's discoveries into wholly
uncharted territory.
Synthesising this diverse basic research with the results of my own work in
cell culture and in vivo, I have formulated the following general conclusions:
1. Melatonin's anti-ageing and anti-cancer effects are at least in part due
to the fact that this hormone, after it leaves the pineal gland (where it is
made), travels to the thymus gland located behind the breastbone and possibly
other endocrine glands where it functions as a "releasing hormone"
and modulates the synthesis of at least two other chemically distinct hormones
unacknowledged by medical science which I will label only as hormone "X"
and hormone "Y" for our purposes here. I have identified the chemical
structures of these substances.
2. It is both the relative and absolute ambient levels of hormones X and Y
in the body that modulate cellular growth, ageing and differentiation phenomena.
This effect is in turn probably modulated by melatonin and at least one trace
metal or its organometallic complexes. Preliminary indications are that these
interactions are complex and remain largely unknown due to the limitations in
funds and facilities under which my previous work has been carried out. The
production of these substances is probably governed by complex feedback loops
that involve the sex hormones, thyroid hormones, etc. Elucidating these relationships
must remain one goal for future research.
3. The thymus gland begins the process of involution after the chronological
age of 20-30 years in humans. The pineal also calcifies and deteriorates. That
is why CT and NMR scans of the heads of older individuals reveal a white pea-sized
object in the basal area of the brain which I have seen many people mistake
for alien implants. I submit that the deterioration of these glands precipitates
a deflection in the concentrations of hormone X, hormone Y, or both. The magnitude
and direction (up or down) of these deflections is unknown, but is probably
downward.
4. It is this perturbation in the levels of hormones X and/or Y that triggers
cell senescence and eventual death, causing tissues to stop turning over and
precipitating the physical declines associated with ageing. Since one of these
hormones is involved in maintaining cells in a differentiated state, this could
provide the long-awaited answer as to why cancer prevalence in general increases
as we age, and also why sexual differentiation and other tissue differentiation
declines in the same interval.
5. Seemingly intractable problems can only be solved by reinterpreting the
problems in novel ways. Cancer cells can be thought of as normal cells which
have reverted to a de-differentiated state—i.e. they resemble rapidly dividing,
undifferentiated embryonic cells rather than the mature, slowly dividing, properly
behaving normal cells of the tissues from which they derive. It is also known
to researchers that cancer cells are effectively immortal; if given a proper
environment, they can live and reproduce indefinitely, just as can bacteria
and certain types of plant and fungal cells. This finding alone indicates that
ageing and death are not the inevitable fates that they are made out to be,
but are instead the results of a program which can be altered. Although little
has been made of this by conventional researchers, it strongly suggests that
cancer is not a disease state, but a developmental problem, just as is ageing.
Cancer cells are not behaving badly, they are just behaving in a manner inappropriate
for their age. It is, in other words, a problem with the biological clock. Since
melatonin is one of the substances that modulates the biological clock, this
would explain melatonin's anti-cancer effects and also suggested to me that
hormones X and Y might have similar effects.
6. Since the chemical structures of both hormones X and Y are attainable by
traditional means of organic synthesis, their manufacture is relatively straightforward.
As is also the case with many other currently acknowledged hormones such as
the oestrogens and progestins, it is possible to synthesise relatively low molecular
weight analogues of hormones X and Y which retain the parent molecule's biological
activity. I have prepared several analogues of this type. These compounds show
the same cellgrowth altering abilities of the parent molecules although the
resources available to me did not facilitate the kind of evaluation necessary
to reach detailed conclusions of the precise actions of these compounds.
7. I have developed other compounds whose chemical structure is quite different
from that of either hormones X or Y that seem to have similar effects on cancer
cells.
8. The exact mechanism of action of these compounds must at this point remain
an object of speculation, since I did not possess the funds or the facilities
to properly investigate this issue. Based on the chemical structure of the compounds,
however, it is reasonable to assume that, on a cellular level, they act in a
manner similar to that of steroid hormones and retinoids (such as vitamin A).
This means that they probably penetrate the cell membrane and are then translocated
to the nucleus where they either promote or inhibit the expression of genes
which regulate the cell growth cycle. This is a much more sophisticated approach
and stands in total contradistinction to the mode of action of virtually all
existing anti-cancer drugs which are really little more than cellular poisons
designed to kill off all rapidly dividing cells. Such a shotgun approach is
responsible for the sometimes horrendous side effects associated with conventional
chemotherapy.
The compounds that I have developed have obvious application in the non-toxic
therapy of cancer and other neoplastic diseases. They also threaten to give
medical science completely new insights into the interaction of the ageing process
with various disease states. If the melatonin–hormone X–hormone Y
axis is indeed responsible for regulating what cells do at particular stages
in their life cycle, then we can explain why, for instance, certain cancers
tend to occur at particular points in people's lives. As we age, perturbations
in the levels of hormones X and Y occur. The hypothesis would predict the incidence
of cancer to vary over the span of a person's life as well. Indeed, that is
precisely what we observe clinically. As we age, the incidence of various cancers
increases. This may be due to the fact that the levels of hormones X and/or
Y are no longer sufficient to maintain certain cells in a differentiated state,
or that the immune system, whose own cells depend on specific amounts of X and
Y, can no longer perform their function of eliminating cancer cells properly.
Finally, although it is too early to be talking seriously about a fountain
of youth, I believe that hormones X and Y represent the first steps toward unravelling
the mystery of why certain organisms and tissues age. Unlike melatonin, the
compounds that I have synthesised represent the first patentable drugs that
actually have the potential of reversing or at least slowing the much-dreaded
biological clock. They are the first non-steroidal, non-proteinaceous, non-retinoid
hormonally active substances other than melatonin and thyroid hormone known
to affect cell growth and differentiation in higher animals.
Furthermore, I have discovered that analogues of both hormones X and Y exist
in nature and can be prepared, for example, from certain plants. These substances
can be incorporated into over-the-counter products such as cosmetics and vitamin
preparations without the difficulty of surmounting regulatory hurdles. The impact,
for instance, of a wrinkle cream which actually thickens the skin and returns
cell turnover rates to levels found in a twenty-year-old should be obvious,
especially since today's cosmetic preparations are mainly designed to cover
up the effects of ageing.
This leads me to question whether ancient legends of fantastic life span for
humans may not have a basis in reality. For example, thousands of years prior
to the biblical era, a Sumerian legend relates the tale of a hero-type figure
by the name of Gilgamesh who travelled far and wide in his quest for eternal
life. He finally found a plant growing under water that was able to bestow the
immortality that Gilgamesh sought. As the tale goes, however, instead of consuming
the plant, he fell asleep. During his slumber, a snake ate the plant—hence
the mythological explanation for snakes constantly shedding and renewing their
skin. The moral lesson of the story is, I suppose, "you snooze, you lose".
Due to Gilgamesh's carelessness, humankind was denied the secret of eternal
life.2 Alas, mythological descriptions of the "plant," if that is
what it was, are not sufficient to make a positive identification.
MEDICAL SCHOOL REALPOLITIK
One would have thought that a student capable of doing research such as this
would be a cause for great enthusiasm at any medical school. My faculty advisor
described me as "the most motivated student he has ever had." Alas,
however, I would soon learn that there were individuals who considered me a
threat rather than a prodigy, and I was soon to be plunged into a confrontation
with forces that, at the time, I could not comprehend.
Between my first and second year of medical school, I was summoned to the office
of a school administration official. Conversation quickly turned to my research.
This raised my interest, as this official's duties did not include oversight
of student research programs. He declined to answer when I asked the identity
of the person that had informed him of my work. He asked why I had decided to
create my own research project rather than simply signing on to one of the many
existing projects offered by faculty members. This was, in his words "what
most students did." I answered that I was not "most" students
and that I had entered medicine because I wanted to find new solutions to problems
that conventional research had failed to find. Rather than eliciting praise
and encouragement, my answer only seemed to make him impatient and agitated.
He enquired as to what was wrong with the available research projects. I responded
that they were mundane and too limited by conventional paradigms to yield anything
of importance in our battle with disease. I now went on the offensive and asked
what was wrong with my research, especially in light of the fact that I was
bringing money and positive publicity to the school. He replied that "of
course there was nothing wrong", and this concluded our meeting. I could
not help but be left with the impression that this official did not accomplish
his aims. My inquiries to other students revealed that no one else had undergone
such an experience.
This encounter was a turning point in my sojourn through medical school and
the subsequent campaign of behind-the-scenes persecution and harassment levelled
against me left me thinking that someone was taking lessons from the Malleus
Maleficarum.
One day I was summoned to the dean's office and told that there was "something
wrong" with my performance in a particular class. Since my grades had been
good in this class up till that point, I was taken aback. I asked the dean to
tell me precisely what I was doing wrong and who had made the criticism. I also
asked why the person making the complaint had taken it to the dean instead of
addressing me directly as per school protocol. He refused to answer and became
agitated. I replied that if indeed I was doing something wrong I had the right
to know the precise nature of the complaint as well as the identity of the person
making it. The dean's reply was that I had no such right because his office
was not a courtroom. This was to become a fairly standard line of defence for
the medical school administration.
Despite my initial good grades and evaluations, the situation deteriorated
as I progressed through clinical clerkships. Despite the fact that my performance
outshone that of many other students, I found myself receiving negative evaluations.
Many of these evaluations were from individuals that I never served under, and
hence, were pure fabrication. On other evaluation forms, the signature of the
evaluator was either absent altogether or was so illegible that even the clerkship
coordinator claimed not to know who the person was. This was an obvious attempt
to shield the individual from litigation. Protesting this kind of outright fraud
to medical school administration fell on deaf ears, and only resulted in new
criticism charging that I was being "defensive." In classic witch-hunt
fashion, any attempts by me to show that the charges against me were false were
only reinterpreted as additional evidence of my guilt or even psychopathology.
I was referred to a psychologist and put through a battery of personality inventories.
When these came back normal, the school administration simply ignored the results
and proceeded to make me jump through an infinite series of new hoops in order
to make me appreciate my status as persona non-grata. This treatment finally
resulted in my leaving medical school partway through my third year. My antagonists
realised that I could not afford legal aid and thus felt secure that their machinations
could not be effectively countered.
Other more mysterious goings-on seemed to swirl around my research while at
medical school. One faculty member refused to address me in the halls and made
a point of walking out during conferences when I presented my research. On more
than one occasion, I entered my lab to find that my possessions had been searched.
To top things off, I received phone calls from someone claiming to be my friend.
This person informed me that things would "only get worse" for me
at medical school unless I "stopped playing God". He refused to give
his name or to explain precisely what he meant by his admonition.
As one can imagine, my leaving medical school was like lifting a huge weight
from my shoulders, despite the fact that I had to discontinue my research. The
oncologist that I had worked with later perished ostensibly of a heart attack
while on vacation.
Since I cannot show that this was anything but a natural occurrence, I leave
it to the reader to decide. After his death, the hospital where he was employed
no longer funded my project citing "other priorities".
When all is said and done, what are we to make of all this? Was I the target
of industrial espionage? If so, they got nothing, as I have always made a point
of carrying my lab notebooks with me at all times and even my faculty advisor
was not made privy to the chemical formulas of the compounds that I was developing.
Was this something entirely different? Was it an attempt to simply quash my
research? If so, did this involve only officials at the medical school or did
it go higher? What could have evoked such a concerted hate campaign against,
of all people, a lowly medical student? Did "they" know something
about the direction and ramifications of my research that even I did not know
at the time?
Given the vitriol directed against me, I cannot help but think that I am on
the right track—to something. I suppose that I should thank my tormentors
for inadvertently confirming what they did not let me have time to confirm in
the lab.
If the goal of the powers that be was to marginalise me, then they have succeeded,
at least for the time being—I am unemployable and my life has been reduced
to financial ruin. I have pursued education in other fields. I am currently
attempting to pursue my research privately since it remains patentable. I have
made arrangements that all proprietary details of the research be made public
in the event of my untimely demise, although I believe that my tormentors have
been quite happy keeping me jobless and impoverished.
Since becoming an avid NEXUS reader a couple of years ago, I have interpreted
my plight in a different light and have begun to ask questions that would never
have occurred to me in medical school. Up until recently, I have operated under
the naïve premise that the purpose of the health care industry was to eliminate
disease and promote human well being. NEXUS readers know better. I leave readers
with the following questions and welcome feedback: What would the implications
be for the health care juggernaut if most illnesses associated with advancing
age could be eliminated by having everyone take one pill daily? What would happen
to our beleaguered social security system if the human life span could be doubled?
What would be the impact on organised religion if one of the two certainties
of life—i.e. death—was no longer a certainty? 8
About the Author:
Andrew Sokar is a biologist who lives in the Midwestern US. He has a Bachelor
of Science, majoring in biology and a master's degree in political science with
a specialisation in internatinal trade, for which he graduated with high distinction.
He continues to pursue his research independently, especially into the over-the-counter
applications for his rejuvenation technology. He welcomes correspondence at:
slowsubversion@yahoo.com.
Endnotes:
1. Walter Pierpaoli, William Regelson and Carol Colman, 1995, The Melatonin
Miracle, Pocket Books, New York. See also William Regelson and Carol Colman,
1996, The Superhormone Promise, Pocket Books, New York
2. N.K. Sanders, 1972, The Epic of Gilgamesh, Penguin, London
Extracted from Nexus Magazine, Volume 12, Number 4 (June - July 2005)
PO Box 30, Mapleton Qld 4560 Australia. editor@nexusmagazine.com
Telephone: +61 (0)7 5442 9280; Fax: +61 (0)7 5442 9381
From our web page at: www.nexusmagazine.com
|
