Dr. Pickart on GHK and Cancer
EDS Skin Care Forums Forum Index » EDS Lounge

free skin care · Sat Feb 27, 2010 7:04 am

{ Moderator: This thread relates to discussion started on the Skinbiology CP Serum thread found at http://www.essentialdayspa.com/forum/viewthread.php?p=521246#521246 }

Here is some very exciting info. that I recently received from Dr. Pickart on GHK and Cancer.

Dr. Pickart told me that the GHK molecule was "one of only two" molecules of 1,309 tested that shut down the cancer promoting genes. And is acts at very low levels and is non-toxic to the healthy cells. He now thinks that the copper peptides may be shifting the DNA activities in the body to be more like a younger person which would mean better skin and less cancer.
I took this post from the Skin Biology website.

From Dr. Pickart:

Quote:

In Clin Exp Metastasis. 2010 Feb 9. [Epub ahead of print], a paper "A 'metastasis-prone' signature for early-stage mismatch-repair proficient sporadic colorectal cancer patients and its implications for possible therapeutics" by Hong Y, Downey T, Eu KW, Koh PK, Cheah PY (Department f Colorectal Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore, 169608,Singapore) the authors searched for substances that can reverse expression of those genes involved in metastasis.

To determine gene expression of normal and cancerous cells, they measured RNA produced by cells. To find substances that can reverse expression of those genes involved in metastasis, they used very reliable database of 7000 genome wide expression profiles after treatment of 4 human cell lines with 1309 bioactive substances. Only two substances, GHK and securenine (an alkaloid) from the choice of 1309 were able to quiet down the genes involved in tumor spreading. The authors also mention low toxicity of GHK and the low concentration(1mkM) that produces desired effect.

................................................

He also told me that he was working with another renowned Bio-Chemist whose name I will not mention at this time on a new 40 page paper on Copper Peptides.

From Dr. Pickart:

Quote:

The possible anti-cancer actions of GHK looks fantastic. Gene control is a very new and exciting area. As we get older, our DNA makes fewer health promoting molecules and more oncogenes that promote cancer and more inflammatory molecules.

I think higher tissue copper keeps cells younger. And GHK mediates this.

Plus if we can activate unused adult stem cells that will be the end of the Hayflick Limit.

................................................This is very exciting news!

Star Model~

Lacy53 wrote:

Star Model wrote:

I posted over on the EDS Lounge some info from Dr. Pickart on GHK and Cancer Prevention. From what I understand, even when applied topically, CPs penetrate into the body and are very protective internally ....

I can't find your post in the lounge, but could you explain how you came to the conclusion that topically applied CPs penetrate into the body etc?

I point blank asked Dr. P if there is any positive effect on the body when applying CPs topically. He said that CPs are absorbed into the skin through the bloodstream and are then converted to GHK. GHK helps to protect the liver, bones, stomach, colon, etc. Smile

The same way that "FDA-approved chemical sunscreens" are ABSORBED into the body filtering through the liver. Chemical Sunscreens are dangerous and highly carcinogenic. Not just with skin cancer - they are known cancer cell promoters. Quite the opposite of what the FDA professes. Cancer has been on the rise in the US due to overuse of chemical SS.

Physical SS's like Titanium Dioxide and Zinc Oxide are a much better choice and the safe way to go. The FDA is very misleading when it comes to chemical SS which may be causing more harm than good. Cancer seems to be too big of a business for them to be honest about it.

I am not sure of the amount of GHK needed to be protective, but since GHK is naturally occurring in the body and diminishes as we age, from what I understand even a little is beneficial.

free skin care · Sat Feb 27, 2010 11:35 am

Star Model wrote:

I too use CPs all over my body - head to toe actually. Very Happy

Definite firming and softness are my results. Mangosteen, I also love the Ylang Ylang/Nutmeg Body Lotion (very exotic but pleasant) as well as the Lavender Scent.

I just wanted to mention that none of the body care products sold by SkinBiology contain GHK-Cu; they all contain hydrolyzed soy protein as the peptide. So I don't think you are getting any of the so-called cancer protection benefits from those products. But your skin may feel nicer.

free skin care · Sat Feb 27, 2010 12:08 pm

sister sweets wrote:

Maybe it would help you to discuss with Dr. Pickart on his site and see where he's coming from. I'm sure he'd break it down for you.

No need for me to discuss it on another forum. I know the difference between a drug and a cosmetic product. I also know the difference between science and marketing. These are cosmetic products, so they will have no systemic effects. Any medical claims are subject to rigorous clinical trials and FDA approval. I know exactly "where he's coming from".

BTW, the study linked to states this:

A ‘metastasis-prone’ signature for early-stage mismatch-repair proficient sporadic colorectal cancer patients and its implications for possible therapeutics

Yi Hong, Thomas Downey, Kong Weng Eu, Poh Koon Koh and Peh Yean Cheah

Journal Clinical and Experimental Metastasis
Received: 26 October 2009 Accepted: 22 January 2010 Published online: 9 February 2010

Abstract

Quote:

Metastasis is the major cause of cancer mortality. We aimed to find a metastasis-prone signature for early stage mismatch-repair proficient sporadic colorectal cancer (CRC) patients for better prognosis and informed use of adjuvant chemotherapy. The genome-wide expression profiles of 82 age-, ethnicity- and tissue-matched patients and healthy controls were analyzed using the Affymetrix U133 Plus 2 array. Metastasis-negative patients have 5 years or more of follow-up. A 10 × 10 two-level nested cross-validation design was used with several families of classification models to identify the optimal predictor for metastasis. The best classification model yielded a 54 gene-set (74 probe sets) with an estimated prediction accuracy of 71%. The specificity, sensitivity, negative and positive predictive values of the signature are 0.88, 0.58, 0.84 and 0.65, respectively, indicating that the gene-set can improve prognosis for early stage sporadic CRC patients. These 54 genes, including node molecules YWHAB, MAP3K5, LMNA, APP, GNAQ, F3, NFATC2, and TGM2, integrate multiple bio-functions in various compartments into an intricate molecular network, suggesting that cell-wide perturbations are involved in metastasis transformation. Further, querying the `Connectivity Map’ with a subset (70%) of these genes shows that Gly-His-Lys and securinine could reverse the differential expressions of these genes significantly, suggesting that they have combinatorial therapeutic effect on the metastasis-prone patients. These two perturbagens promote wound-healing, extracellular matrix remodeling and macrophage activation thus highlighting the importance of these pathways in metastasis suppression for early-stage CRC.

This has nothing to do with the topical application of GHK-Cu to the skin and the prevention or treatment of cancer.

free skin care · Sat Feb 27, 2010 12:45 pm

Lacy53 wrote:

This has nothing to do with the topical application of GHK-Cu to the skin and the prevention or treatment of cancer.

Nobody said that the study was done on topical application. But when I asked Dr. P "How does that fit in with 2nd generation SRCPs?", he responded that when CPs are absored into the bloodstream they are converted into GHK-cu which is naturally occurring in the body and protective. Production declines as we age though.

This was my understanding of how CPs tie in with GHK.

If this holds true, I don't see the point in fighting it. At least we know that CPs and GHK are not harmful to the body as so many FDA approved cosmetic ingredients have turned out to be.

free skin care · Sat Feb 27, 2010 1:04 pm

Star Model wrote:

Lacy53 wrote:

This has nothing to do with the topical application of GHK-Cu to the skin and the prevention or treatment of cancer.

Nobody said that the study was done on topical application. But when I asked Dr. P "How does that fit in with 2nd generation SRCPs?", he responded that when CPs are absored into the bloodstream they are converted into GHK-cu which is naturally occurring in the body and protective. Production declines as we age though.

This was my understanding of how CPs tie in with GHK.

If this holds true, I don't see the point in fighting it. At least we know that CPs and GHK are not harmful to the body as so many FDA approved cosmetic ingredients have turned out to be.

This has no tie-in to second generation CPs at all. I see no evidence that CPs are absorbed into the bloodstream in any study; do you know of any?

I am not fighting, just asking people to use their common sense and be discriminating when taking the word of companies who retail cosmetic products in the consumer market.

The FDA does not approved cosmetics ingredients so I do not understand your statement regarding the safety of CPs and GHK. There are many anecdotal reports of people having negative effects from the use of copper peptide products though, even on this forum.

free skin care · Sat Feb 27, 2010 1:28 pm

I am referring to the FDA approval of toxic chemical sunscreens. Who better than from Dr. Pickart himself to learn about GHK? He is the man who disovered and studied it for 40 years.

I may be wrong about the absorption but that was my understanding from a direct converstion I had with him. I will double check when I speak to him again.

free skin care · Sat Feb 27, 2010 3:01 pm

Lacy53 wrote:

Star Model wrote:

Lacy53 wrote:

No need for me to discuss it on another forum. I know the difference between a drug and a cosmetic product. I also know the difference between science and marketing. These are cosmetic products, so they will have no systemic effects. Any medical claims are subject to rigorous clinical trials and FDA approval. I know exactly "where he's coming from".

I am referring to the FDA approval of toxic chemical sunscreens. Who better than from Dr. Pickart himself to learn about GHK? He is the man who disovered and studied it for 40 years.

I may be wrong about the absorption but that was my understanding from a direct converstion I had with him. I will double check when I speak to him again.

It might be better to discuss "toxic chemical sunscreens" and systemic effects on the human body on new thread, rather than taking this one off-topic. Perhaps you could start one?

I am not going "off topic" as you suggest. Rather was making a case for absorption.

Chemical Suncreens are toxic to the body when they are absorbed, not when they are applied. CPs also absorb (according to my understanding from an earlier conversation with Dr. Pickart) and go through the bloodstream then through the liver.

Sun Feb 28, 2010 8:43 am

We have just gone through and cleaned up this thread from the sarcastic, snide and condescending comments, none of which are welcome here as they derail sincere discussion and discourage thoughtful comments. All replies related to these instances have been deleted. Thank you to those who reported the situation.

free skin care · Sun Feb 28, 2010 11:21 am

Dr. Pickart is off "On Holiday" so I have learned. Very Happy

I will try to get his comments on "CPs and absorption" which is how this whole drama erupted.

In the mean time, here's some info. on "Chemical sunscreens and toxicity" found on the SB site from Dr. Pickart's research on the topic:

http://reverseskinaging.com/toxicsunscreens.html

Here's another link to a different page where he talks at length about GHK absorption in the cells:
http://reverseskinaging.com/studies5.html

It is very informative and worth checking out for those who are concerned with chemical toxicity and cancer and how to combat it.

Star Model~

free skin care · Sun Feb 28, 2010 11:47 am

Star Model wrote:

Dr. Pickart is off "On Holiday" so I have learned. Very Happy

I will try to get his comments on "CPs and absorption" which is how this whole drama erupted.

Here's another link to a different page where he talks at length about GHK absorption in the cells:
http://reverseskinaging.com/studies5.html

Star Model~

Thanks for the link. He makes it very clear on the difference between GHK and GHK-Cu. As I stated previously, they are not one in the same thing (even though you seem to use the terms interchangeably).

You may also like to read this study; it makes the distinction even clearer:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11045606

free skin care · Sun Feb 28, 2010 6:35 pm

rileygirl wrote:

Star Model wrote:

I point blank asked Dr. P if there is any positive effect on the body when applying CPs topically. He said that CPs are absorbed into the skin through the bloodstream and are then converted to GHK.

So, does this mean that his 2nd generation CP's are converted back to GHK? If that is the case, why not just use the 1st generation and not the 2nd that has to convert? Sorry if I am confused on this matter!

As I recall from reading his book, the SRCPs (2nd generation) have better absorption or something like that for facial skin applications, while GHK was better for surgical applications like wound healing.

Plus I think there was a patent (and timing) issue for some time regarding the 1st generation GHK, and Procyte owned the product rights (which I guess meaned that he had to pay them when he was selling it).

But there was also a lot of chatter as to whether or not SRCPs were really proven, since most of the research was on the 1st generation peptides.

Editing to add: Here is a snippet that mentions both GHK and GHK-cu. They are not the same, but I think that they are often used interchangably from a discussion standpoint(especially on his forum). But his 1st gen products say GHK Copper on the labels.

Quote:

GHK, which is generated in damaged tissues, directly accelerates many healing associated properties at concentration of around 10exp(-10)M. Some of the GHK stimulated effects seem to be directly mediated by GHK or GHK-Cu after it obtains copper (II) from albumin. Other actions of GHK and GHK-Cu are likely to arise from GHK-Cu's attraction of wound macrophages and other healing-associated immune cells which, in turn, release families of growth factor proteins appropriate to the repair of the damaged tissue.

http://reverseskinaging.com/studies5.html

free skin care · Sun Feb 28, 2010 6:54 pm

Lacy52 wrote:

I do not think I know more that Dr. Pickart about GHK-Cu, nor have I ever said or even implied that. I still don't understand why anyone would be excited about the latest research findings which involve GHK and Colorectal cancer since they have nothing to do with topical application of SkinBiology products (maybe we have a different level of understanding of the whole situation).

I, for one, am excited about hearing this news about GHK and cancer suspression. CPs have tons of studies showing many uses on healing and skin remodeling.

In reference to your saying that the GHK and GHK-Cu being completely different (possibly hidden in the other thread), Let me say that I will use the term ‘GHK’ for ‘GHK-Cu’ interchangeably, mainly because it’s easier to type. I’ve also never had anyone question my use of it. Most people know what is being referred to when the term ‘GHK’ is used in connection with posts on copper peptides.

To get down to the gist of it - GHK is a human peptide found in our blood and activates a remodeling process during tissue breakdown. GHK has a “high affinity for copper 2+ and forms of complex GHK-Cu “(Dr Pickart’s discovery). He says “these 2 molecules activate the remodeling process”.

Dr Pickart says that both GHK-Cu and 2nd generation CPs “transfer copper to molecules” needed for wound healing and that the CPs in CP Serum (and other 2nd gen CPs) will “act like GHK-Cu in the skin.”

Findings made in studies of GHK-Cu have found it stimulates healing and on ‘aged humans’, it tightens skin, improves elasticity and firmness, reduces fines lines, wrinkles, photo damage and hyperpigmentation as well as improving hair transplants and quite a few other uses posted here.

Dr Pickart goes to great lengths to explain his studies on his website. I do wish he could simplify them for the average lay person, though. I will believe what he tells us because of all the work he goes through to prove his studies, even though I find most of those explanations a bit too much to take in.

I think it is great news that he has found another use of his GHK-Cu. I’m sure a supplement is in the works. What started as a discovery for wound healing has led to skin and hair renewal and now a cancer treatment?

In the meantime, I will continue to use the 2nd gen CPs for my skin care as I have anecdotal proof that they work for me! Any additional things(like a reverse expression of cancer genes) is just an extra bonus to me.

free skin care · Sun Feb 28, 2010 10:04 pm

Just to complicate things further, I was recently reading about copper levels being too high and causing fatigue if there is not enough zinc to offset it.

I wonder what CP's do to the overall level of copper in the body?

Quote:

Vegetarian-based diets are very high in copper. Copper is the mineral that competes with zinc in absorption. A copper toxic woman is one who can suffer from anxiety attacks, panic attacks and is prone to candida albicans infections. Excess copper is probably the most underrated toxic mineral problem that we have in this day and age. The strange thing is that toxic copper does not show through a traditional blood test. It is only through tissue samples of hair that I have found how many women are storing this bio-unavailable or unbound copper.

Women who crave chocolate and women who drink a great deal of regular tea, for example, may be very copper toxic. Racing thoughts, insomnia, fibroid tumors and female baldness, as well as migraine headaches and numerous food and environmental ailments have all been attributed to copper toxicity.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0675/is_n5_v10/ai_12695229/pg_3/

Quote:

Copper overload is an insidious but increasingly common nutritional problem, says Dr. Ann Louise, and that difficulty getting out of bed, midday slumps, mood swings, insomnia, and anxiety may be symptoms of a copper/zinc imbalance. She discovered this link after she encountered several patients in her nutritional practice--most of them women--who were not suffering from hypothyroidism, adrenal problems, or anemia (as she had suspected), but rather a mineral imbalance that was diagnosed after simple hair testing.

http://www.annlouise.com/25/women-s-health/12/

free skin care · Mon Mar 01, 2010 10:47 am

Star Model wrote:

I am a vegetarian myself and have been for a very long time. Using CPs for my skin for a long time too. My body is in sync. I’ve added 3mg copper every other day to my vitamin cocktail. Men can take it more often, but should not really exceed 3 mg/daily. Zinc to copper ratio should be 7:1. While there is a lot of good info to be found out there on the web, there is equally as much bad that often is the source of misunderstanding and confusion.

You may want to check out Dr. Gittleman's qualifications before you infer that she has misunderstood requirements and is confused, lol.

For starters, she has a Ph.D. in Holistic Nutrition, is a Certified Nutrition Specialist (CNS), and has a M.S. in Nutrition Education.

Here is a link to the rest of her credentials:

http://www.annlouise.com/10/credentials/

free skin care · Mon Mar 01, 2010 10:54 am

Posted 17 May 2007 04:27 PM

Dear SB and Dr Pickart,

I had some very good results from the CPs night eyes and being somewhat of a scientist I had a question.

Do you know how much of the copper peptides make it past the deeper dermis and into the blood supply? Have there been any studies as to whether the active ingredients can make their way systemically?
Its only to do with my general curiosity and recently reading that glycolic acid doesnt penetrate deeper into the blood supply.

Thanks!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dr. Pickart:

About 0.1 % of the copper penetrates the skin. But in all the animal safety studies and the human trials, we never observed a rise in blood copper.

It is difficult for charged water-loving molecules to penetrate human skin.

http://healthyskin.infopop.cc/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/5990018252/m/9650001194?r=7560065194#7560065194

free skin care · Mon Mar 01, 2010 1:06 pm

Star Model wrote:

No need to get combative. Unfortunately, I have noticed that as soon as the accusatory tone comes out so do the same combatants.

That's why one should avoid using any type of accusatory tone. No accusations or inferences = no combatants.

At the end of the day, none of the people in this discussion appear to have the qualifications to say what the nutritional ratios for copper:zinc should be (and that would include Pickart). Fortunately, we can all do our own research and come up with the approach we feel is best for our particular situation. Smile

free skin care · Mon Mar 01, 2010 6:28 pm

Star Model wrote:

If the aim here is to try to discredit anything that Dr. Pickart thinks or says, then you can pull out fragmented statements all day long in any attempts. But why? If you don't agree with the GHK Cancer research, then I would think you would just not bother with it.

Unless you are in the exact same business, it doesn't make sense to so quickly attack as if on the same level as the scientists who study copper.

I posted this because I found it very encouraging and wanted to share it with others, that's all. Not create a war.

It's as simple as that. Smile

Exactly who is attacking? I personally haven't said anything about the cancer research. I clarified the GHK/GHK-cu since you weren't clear, added a little CP history from historical discussions, and asked a question about copper levels overall, while quoting a nationally known nutritionist's concerns.

I'm really not sure where the high level of emotion is coming from. But I'll just sit back and wait to hear the rest of the details when Pickart makes them available, and leave the drama to those that are looking for it. Rolling Eyes

free skin care · Thu Mar 04, 2010 9:00 pm

Star Model wrote:

And Yes, Dr. P is thrilled about this.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but do you know Pickart IRL, or work with him in some capacity?

I am certainly not asking this in an accusatory manner in any way...it's just unusual for forum participants to be so in tune to the emotions of these product developers and "brilliant scientists."

Of course, if you have the inside scoop on what is happening with Dr. P, that's a benefit for everyone here at EDS! Very Happy

Automatic Message

If this is your first visit to the EDS Forums please take the time to register. Registration is required for you to post on the forums. Registration will also give you the ability to track messages of interest, send private messages to other users, participate in Gift Certificates draws and enjoy automatic discounts for shopping at our online store. Registration is free and takes just a few seconds to complete.

Click Here to join our community.

If you are already a registered member on the forums, please login to gain full access to the site.