BPC 157 and secondary Tumor growth?

[Mrshred]

I'm not he smartest but am I reading that correctly...?

BPC 157 and blood vessels. - PubMed - NCBI

 

[Capin]

Hhhhhmmmmm ya me reed 2
No git
gonna need someone wiff edumacaktion to splane

 

[Capin]

I have been using BPC-157 for a torn supraspinatus that was very painful. And I am impressed at how well it works! Started off at 500mcgs per day for a week then dropped down to 300mcgs per day.
It also apparently has a systemic effect all my joints feel better!

 

[Severed Ties]

Need full study the abstract says nothing of substance.

 

[lakota1]

Based on what my doc told me after I recovered from lymphoma...I'll use hgh in this case... it will only effect you negatively if you have current tumors. In the case with bpc it causes additional vascularization. "we have neoangiogenesis resulting in pathological vascularization, vascular invasion resulting in release of metastatic cells and the phenomenon of homing resulting in formation of secondary tumors--metastases."

In this case it's speaking of metastatic cells...which come from current cancer in the body. Based on that if you're cancer free, metastasization will not happen. Unless you're administering huge doses for a long period of time and injecting in a localized spot continually even though bpc is systemic I don't think you would experience any issues.

I have used it from time to time with excellent results and will continue to, and believe me I stay clear of anything that is believe can result in cancer. I don't ever want to go through that shit again.

 

[grandstaff]

i think this guy sum'd it up pretty good........i just copy & pasted it for you from the other BPC 157 thread.


Severed Ties Severed Ties is offline
FOUNDING Member

Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrshred View Post
BPC 157 and blood vessels. - PubMed - NCBI


This study is concerning to me about BPC


Mentions tumors at the end
If you're basing your concerns off a study abstract without access to examine the full study you probably should avoid peptides entirely. You saw the word tumor used without any idea of the context and decided BPC is dangerous while ignoring the 99% of other papers on PubMed discussing it's safety.

What you posted is a review which means the authors interpertation of published studies by various groups on how BPC effects damaged blood vessels. All this review states is BPC is the most potent angiomodulatory agent which is why it was chosen for the review though it doesn't say what other agents were considered in comparison to BPC. As well the end only states that blood cell formation is relevant in tumor biology. It does not draw any conclusion or even suggest BPC has an impact. It only suggests theoretical problems that stimulation of blood cell formation can be involved in with stimulation of the vascular system. Since BPC interacts potently with said system they may be trying to lay the ground work for funding future research in this area. Since we can't read the full text to see what work the author is citing we have no way of knowing if he's basing his as assertions on a dissenting opinion of BPC research, research on tumor biology without regard to BPC, some other vascular drug he's just guessing works the same way BPC might....since all the other research on BPC is positive he could simply be trying to get his name recognized by publishing guesses as to what could go wrong in patients with existing tumors since again this isn't actual research just someone's opinion.

You can find far more "concerning" papers on PubMed about Diet Coke, creatine, high protein diets, or cell phones causing cancer if you ignore context and call it science.
Share
| Like