Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Tuesday March 03 2020, @02:08PM   Printer-friendly
from the a-whole-bunch-of-oranges dept.

Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:

Linus Pauling was a fearsomely great scientist who is remembered by the general public for his advocacy of megadoses of Vitamin C, a favorite topic of his later in life. Infectious disease, cancer: Pauling advised gram amounts of ascorbic acid and had a lot of theorizing to offer about why that was beneficial. So while his scientific legacy is (among other things) his work on chemical bonding, on genetically-based disease and the concept of molecular biology in general, and plenty of lesser-known deeds such as encouraging the earliest NMR studies of organic compounds, his legacy in the wider world involves increased vitamin sales and the association of Vitamin C in particular with the treatment of disease.

Unfortunately, Pauling's ideas about how Vitamin C would prevent and treat disease were wrong. Instead of having an antioxidant effect (which is one of the things he proposed and what most people associate with it), at very high doses ascorbic acid has a pro-oxidant mechanism of action (see below). This is almost entirely seen with i.v. dosing, and it's worth noting that Pauling's 1976 paper on prolongation of life in terminal cancer patients via ascorbate supplementation used a combination of oral and i.v. routes. Attempts to follow up on this observation (mostly with oral dosing) did not reproduce the effect, and it's become clear that if you're going to see anything, it's via intravenous administration, and at even higher doses than Pauling thought.

Here's a new paper from a team in Italy that suggests that these effects have to do with immuno-oncology, and that the combination of i.v. ascorbate and immunomodulators might be quite useful. Vitamin C only showed effects in mouse tumor models when the animals had a fully competent immune system. Narrowing down, its beneficial effects appear to depend on T-cell pathways: antibodies to CD4 or CD8, for example, took things back to baseline tumor development. But on the other hand, the combination of Vitamin C with anti-PD1 and/or anti-CTLA-4 antibodies was noticeably more effective. This appears to be independent of the pro-oxidative damage mechanism mentioned above, as well as of the reported effects of high-dose ascorbate on iron metabolism.

The big question is, does this apply to humans?

-- submitted from IRC

[Ed Note: This is from "In The Pipeline", described as "Derek Lowe's commentary on drug discovery and the pharma industry." - Fnord666]


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 04 2020, @12:08PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 04 2020, @12:08PM (#966435)

    Vit C is cheap and easy to obtain. Thus it's easy to research for researchers who want to do research but can't afford other drugs and the drug companies want research saying it's not helpful so you'll buy their patented products. Both things end up creating more articles about Vit C.