We have read that there were many ways to reverse cataract and restore vision without resorting to surgery. Firstly, the light therapy used to cure thousands of patients by Dr. William Luftig from 1930-1965 using large optical reflectors made of crystal glass, or the light therapy used by Dr. Robert Brooks-Simpkins, using his "Fixoscope" in the 1970's, and secondly, the long list of eyedrops which were developed since the 1960's up to the present day, some of which had successful clinical trials (C-KAD completed Phase II clinical trials in 2009). In addition, thirdly, countless cataracts were cleared without surgery by Dr. Stanley Evans, a nutritional optometrist who practised for many decades. Most patients would have preferred any of these options to surgery.
But we still haven't answered the question of "Why" the eye profession did not implement any of them in clinical practice, instead choosing to ignore all of them and offer invasive surgery as the sole and only option to treat cataract. I invite all Curezone readers to post their reasons as to "Why", despite the reality of proven nonsurgical options - two of which had already been practised for decades in the past - this situation has existed for almost 100 years, and continues to exist today.
Cruelly ignored, but NOT forgotten
The whole world believes the eye profession treats all eye diseases. But although they had the means, they never wanted to treat cataract and still do not want to. Despite the fact that effective eyedrops had been developed by biochemists around the world since 1980, eye doctors still only want to perform cataract surgery, and destroy the natural lens even though cataracts could have been treated.
Few people are aware that the eyedrops in the list below were ever developed. But don't take my word for it, please look them all up on the Internet. They each clear the lens by different mechanisms. Each of them was a bright ray of hope for humanity. Most of them could have put an end to cataract surgery for good, but one after another, all of them were cruelly ignored. Despite their success in the lab, in animal models or even human trials, none of them were ever offered to cataract patients by the eye profession, as they should have been. Consequently, the only option available today continues to be surgery.
I often wondered whether any of the ophthalmologists appearing in the glowing advertisements for cataract surgery on the Net have had cataract surgery themselves. At least, one rarely hears about it. Probably, they are more reluctant than we are, since they know that a plastic IOL is inferior to their natural eye lens, and they know the risks.
Of course, everybody who is facing cataract surgery would rather avoid it, and clear their vision by treating their cataracts with eyedrops which do not destroy the integrity of their eye. Since many such eyedrops already existed, this means that cataract surgery is an unnecessary operation.
Even if the surgery is successful, all remaining power of accommodation is lost, so if a monofocal IOL is implanted, several pairs of eyeglasses will be needed to cope with near and distance vision. Also, due to the loss of accommodation, multifocal eyeglasses can no longer be used, so there may be trouble going up or down stairways. All this could have been avoided by the eyedrops in the list, which preserve the power of accommodation. As if that weren't enough, surgery carries risks of inferior outcomes and secondary complications.
Yet in the world today, many people with cataracts (around 35 million) do not have access even to surgery. The prior existence of these non-surgical eyedrops therefore also means that 35 million people are needlessly blind. Here is the list:
1. Reduced glutathione - a S=S bond breaker (Japan, 1960)
2. Esters that restore optical clarity (Benedek at al., MIT, 1980)
3. Bifunctional molecules that restore optical clarity "in lieu" of the natural chaperone, alpha-crystallin (Muthukumar, University of Massachusetts, 2017)
4. N-acetylcarnosine (NAC) (Babizhayev, Russia, 1996)
5. Organic germanium (G-132, G-385, etc.) - an AGE solubilizer (Nakamura et al., Kitasato University, Japan, 2000)
6. Lutein - a "surrogate" carotenoid (previously available on the Internet, but no longer)
7. Aldose reductase inhibitors (Kinoshita, 2010, USA)
8. C-KAD - a glycation inhibitor plus chelating agent (Chakshu Pharmaceuticals, 2002, USA)
9. NACA (N-acetylcysteine amide) - a reduced glutathione precursor (Ercal, University of Missouri, 2016)
10. Lanosterol and 25-hydroxycholesterol - "chaperone" stabilizers (Kang Zhang, USA, 2015)
11. Rosmarinic acid - an AGE crosslink breaker (Glikman et al, University of Tel Aviv, Israel, 2018)
This list is not exhaustive.
There are some limitations. Firstly, reduced glutathione works only in about 50% of cases. Next, although NAC can still be bought on the Internet, it is not likely to improve cataract unless combined with a chelating agent such as EDTA, as it was in C-KAD. Finally, lanosterol or other sterols are not likely to work unless some unmodified alpha-crystallin remains in the lens, as there would be in early cataract. But the other agents on this list do not have any such limitations. They reversed advanced cataracts too, and are desperately needed today. Anybody who reads this post and can do something about this tragic situation, please reply.
Why does Can-C often fail when used alone? Let me try to explain it again. ALPHA-CRYSTALLIN IN YOUR LENS KEEPS YOUR LENS CLEAR. So when your alpha-crystallin gets hooked up with bad molecules, known as AGEs, IT CAN'T DO ITS JOB OF KEEPING YOUR LENS CLEAR ANY MORE. But, if you break the bonds between the ALPHA and the AGEs, or if you simply destroy the AGEs, either of which actions will release your ALPHA, then it CAN do its job again and the cataracts will disappear! Breaking those bonds between your ALPHA and the AGEs is difficult. Only rosmarinic acid can do that. But destroying the AGEs is easier. Since many of the AGEs are COLORED PIGMENTS, they absorb light, and so they can be destroyed by photobleaching them. The master cleaner molecule in your lens, GLUTATHIONE, actually does photobleach the AGEs. So how about CAN-C? What does CAN-C do? Can-C contains N-acetyl carnosine. What does N-acetyl carnosine do? It prevents more bad AGEs from hooking up with your alpha-crystallin. In that sense, it will prevent an early cataract from getting worse. But that said, if there are copper and zinc metal ions in your lens, then your master cleaner (GLUTATHIONE) will PARTIALLY lose its ability to photobleach the AGEs. And if you then dose your eye with N-acetyl carnosine (Can-C) eye drops, it will COMPLETELY lose that ability. This mechanism was only revealed at Queen Mary College, London University, in 2010. So I would say that people who get improvement with Can-C alone - either they do not have metal ions in the lens - or they do have enough remaining glutathione to overcome the loss of photobleaching capacity. Other people, including me, tried Can-C and it did not work. It just made the vision more yellow, because of the loss of photobleaching. But if you chelate the metal ions in your lens with EDTA, then there will be no loss of photobleaching and the Can-C should make things better, not worse - even if you have advanced cataracts like me. This was proven, many years before the study at Queen Mary College, by the eye drop C-KAD containing both carnosine and EDTA (as well as MSM, a penetration enhancer), which was developed by the company Chakshu Research in the US. It was clinically trialed on a few people in the US in 2002, including one or two with advanced nuclear cataract, and the results were very good. Later, in 2008, a larger Phase I/II clinical trial of 111 cataract patients was completed, with the following results:
https://crstodayeurope.com/articles/2008-mar/0308_05-php/
Quote: In a subgroup analysis, results showed that C-KAD was a safe treatment that helped patients lower intraocular pressure and gain lines of BCVA (Best Corrected Visual Acuity). According to the company, 43% of patients in a group of patients who achieved the best results with the drug, a two-line improvement in BCVA was seen.
Today, C-KAD is 'mysteriously' unavailable, which should come as no surprise, because it clearly had ample potential to reduce cataract symptoms in millions of people without the need for surgery. But it just occurred to me right now that theoretically, THREE EYE DROPS USED TOGETHER might get the same results as with C-KAD:
1) Can-C or any other carnosine eye drop, e.g., "Brite-Eyes"
2) MSM / EDTA eye drops The MSM will soften the lens, and the EDTA will chelate the metal ions which are interfering with your glutathione.
3) Reduced glutathione eye drops
This way, the carnosine will block accumulation of further AGEs, the EDTA will help your glutathione to photobleach the existing AGEs which are preventing your Alpha-crystallin from doing its job, and if you don't have any reduced glutathione left in your lens, the reduced glutathione eye drops will make sure you do.
Just one word of caution - EDTA can also dissolve and permanently destroy the tiny "balance stones" (otoconia) in your inner ear which are made of calcite (crystalline calcium carbonate), and that will give you rotational vertigo (BPPV, a horrible condition which I recently had for about 1 year). Whether or not EDTA in eye drops would reach the inner ear, is a question I cannot answer. Of course, you can always try Can-C alone, and just see what happens.
ALMOST TWO YEARS LATER, AND STILL NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE!!!
Rosmarinic Acid Restores Complete Transparency of Sonicated Human Cataract Ex Vivo and Delays Cataract Formation In Vivo Chemerovski-Glikman, M., Mimouni, M., Dagan, Y. et al.
This article appeared in the June, 2018 edition of the scientific journal, Nature.
Quote from this article:
Taken together, our results support the concept that aggregation inhibition may provide a pharmacological treatment strategy for cataract, and highlight rosmarinic acid as a promising potential for palliative treatment of cataract, the leading cause of blindness worldwide. Data obtained from carefully designed and conducted future clinical studies may provide a strong foundation for design of the proper treatment regimen, dosage and duration. We hope that in the near future this promising pharmacological treatment will provide a safe, inexpensive and easily-accessible therapy for cataract.
As my cataracts continue to worsen with no hope of treatment in sight, I called a professor in the university department where this work had been carried out. I asked him whether there had been any move towards an eyedrop based on this momentous discovery.
Q: What is the status of your application for an anticataract eyedrop based on rosmarinic acid?
A: Why don't you have surgery?
Q: Why do you ask me that question?
Silence of several seconds
A: You know, I'm not an eye doctor.
Q: Then why did you bother to do this research?
Silence of several seconds
A: I'm a scientist. It was for the sake of scientific knowledge. If you need treatment, ask your eye doctor.
Q: I told you, the eye profession won't help us.
A: You know, if people want to use our discovery, there's nothing to stop them.
Q: But cataract patients have no lab facilities to make sterile eye drops. What do you expect us to do?
A: Silence. No answer.
This concluded our conversation, which ended up going nowhere. Of course, I had not really expected anything else. He more or less admitted that this discovery, like all the anticataract agents before it, would be consigned to the annals of scientific knowledge without ever being used to help the 20 million+ human beings who are blind from cataract, and have to spend all their days fumbling around in eternal darkness. As I said before, mint contains rosmarinic acid, and mint is already a component of Ayurvedic (Indian) eye drops such as Isotine, where it is included at a concentration of 0.015%. The problem is, those eye drops also contain metal salts which would make the cataracts even worse. We need an eye drop with the mint, but without the metals.
Add This Forum To Your Favorites!
Forum Stats:
forum viewed 480,474 times
595 messages
108 topics
topics per page limited to: 8
average number of messages per page: 46
13 pages
CureZone Newsletter is distributed in partnership with www.netatlantic.com
Copyright 1999 - 2024 www.curezone.org