United Nation Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation

Comisia Nationala a Romaniei pentru

UNESCO

Centrul de Studii pentru Stiinte de Granita

Pentru a transmite direct mesajul dumneavoastra tuturor
membrilor apasati clik pe butonul alaturat

Membrii Centrului de Studii pentru Stiinte de Granita

Nr.
Crt
.
1
2
3
4

Numele si
prenumele

6
7

Bojor Ovidiu
Banc Andrei
Constandache G.
Cristea Aurelia
Dimoftache
Constantin
Dop Radu
Dorobantu Andrei

Dumitru Constantin

Telefon fix

Telefon
mobil
0724479193

0217262562
0217716744
0213192896

Observatii

ovidiu.bojor@home.ro
andrei.banc@gmail.com
g_constandache@yahoo.fr

0213188338
0722333999
0726694024
0788494648

9 Farcas Dan
10 Filip Florin
11 Iamandescu I.B.

0214138383
0212128658

12 Ilinca Mircea

0232211686 0744514556

13 Luchian Octavian
14 Marginean Mircea
Mencinicopschi
15
Gh.
16 Oprescu Ion
17 Paun Ludovic
18 Popescu Cristian
19 Popescu Gabriel

Adresa de e-mail

0745035942

dumitruconstantindulcan@yahoo.co
m
dandfarcas@yahoo.com
iamandb@yahoo.com
ilincamircea@yahoo.com

- secretar
general

0745088688
0723207061
0744575778
0216427368
0216427368 0722204992
0722336332
0212304911

ioprescu@rnc.ro
mcpopescu@amaltea.ro
popescugg@yahoo.com

20 Restian Adrian

0724480247

arestian@hotmail.com

21 Trausan-Matu

0724985518

trausan@racai.ro

- presedinte
fondator

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41

Stefan
Zagrean Leon
Dragan Simona
Fabritius Klaus
Herman Sonia
Jompan Afilon
Lazarescu Mircea
Schneider Francisc
Savulescu April
Geo
Sirbu Carmen
Predescu Ovidiu
Tanase Dorina
Guja Cornelia
Ciulean Alexandru
Sorea Daniela
Lucia Simona
Dinescu
Laslo Claudia
Elena
Mironov Alexandru
Robberb Peter
Oostveen
Stoian Marin
Pascu Gabriel

3120880 0723584722
0256491880 0723250937
0722345474
6874519
0722318354
0743403631
0766230134
3172891 0722610505
0788353460
3186906 0720324231
3191448 0745121528
6671973 0720874396
6741757
0268315956 0727357695
3484530 0722971696
0723345672

leon.zagrean@gmail.com
sdragan@cardiologie.ro
liasonia@gmail.com

Ageos@b.astral.ro
sircar13@yahoo.com
opredescu@cliknet.ro
dorinatt@yahoo.com
cguja@yahoo.com
danasorea@yahoo.fr
lucia_simona@yahoo.com
salasdesus@yahoo.com

0723394221
0744569507

drosa@arexim.ro

0727507179
0720680484

marin.stoian@gmail.com
gabipascu2000@yahoo.com

Pentru a transmite direct mesajul dumneavoastra tuturor

membrilor apasati clik pe butonul alaturat

Prima pagina

A NEW SOLUTION FOR CANCER

Yamanaka and Gurdon discovered that mature and specialized cells "can be
(nervously also?!) reprogrammed to become immature cells capable of
developing into all tissues of the body," the Nobel Assembly at Sweden's
Karolinska Institute said. http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/nn20121009a1.html

That's (exactly like) the cancer, folks!

cancer evolving based on two strictly distinct mechanisms, which take place
simultaneously:

1) Malignant processes under the influence of the parasympathetic nervous system

activity at the stromal level, involving the invasive, active effects of these processes,
2) The uncontrolled proliferation of malignant cells in the parenchyma.
I showed that, if the malignant process consists exclusively of 2) processes,
the feedback loops that maintain the geometric - functional stability would generate
efficient reactions of structures of the body's against to a "non self" structure (as is known
to be the tumor) that should move the healthy tissue, in its development. Precisely to
avoid the reactions of this system, the healthy tissue is not "pushed" but "replaced".(see
below).
CONTENTS i985

//garfield.library.upenn.edu/classics1985/A1985AEP1600002.pd
http://garfield.library.upenn.edu/classics1985/A1985AEP1600002.
http://garfield.library.upenn.edu/classics1985/A1985AEP1600002 . I

hhttp://garfield.library.upenn.edu/classics1985/A1985AEP1600002.pdf
http://garfield.library.upenn.edu/classics1985/A1985AEP1600002.pdfSI L

In 1957, a physician researcher out of the National Cancer Institute, Richmond Prehn, M.D.,
published a landmark study co-authored with his laboratory assistant, Joan M. Main. Its findings
turned conventional wisdom about cancer and the immune system on its head.
What they discovered was that surgically removing tumors from sarcoma-ridden mice not only cured
the mice of cancer the treated mice also were immune to all subsequent efforts to reinoculate them
with the same sarcoma.
Prehn and Malin were revolutionary, Dr. Curti says. Before their 1957 study, even the suggestion
that the immune system had a role to play in cancer treatment would have been regarded in many
scientific circles with skepticism. Now the hope was that new cancer therapies and vaccines could be
developed that would rival both chemotherapy and radiation in their effectiveness.
But despite thousands of attempts to capitalize on Prehn and Mains success, that hope has gone
largely unrealized.
What we have learned is that a successful immune system response in humans depends on not just
one event, but a series of events from the presentation of a foreign marker on the surface of the
cancer cell to the homing behavior of killer T-cells to the tumor site, Dr. Curti says. These are like
links in a chain, and any weak link can spell disaster for an effective immune system response.

http://oregon.providence.org/patients/facilities/providence-portland-medicalcenter/Pages/formsandinformationlanding.aspx?
&TemplateName=Bringing+out+the+big+guns+to+kill+cancer&TemplateType=FormsandInstructions
In the past time, at this address, were also made references to this material.
There is a similarity between the approach of Prehn and Main and surgical method of denervation of
solid tumors (ablation and their quasi immediate inoculation to the same animal), theoretically
described as the treatment of the cancer in Gravitational Theory of Life.
Based on these procedural similarities on the recovery situation of Prehn and Main results (But
despite thousands of attempts to capitalize on Prehn and Mains success, that hope has gone largely
unrealized.), I used this material as a possible experimental prove of the validity of the

principle of denervation in curing solid tumors (together with the chemical method which
follows the same principle contained also in the U.S. patent below, without that the
denervation to be included among the claims):

http://www.patentlens.net/patentlens/patents.html?patnums=US_2005_0031648_A1&language=&).

Page. 16 of the patent (paragraph [0189])

shows that the author considers the "denervation" but that it is only noted not being the objective
pursued (because the "denervation" it must be permanent, until the tumor death).

On page 17 (paragraph [0195])

there is surprisingly long therapeutic effect occurring by the denervation process. And so on.
Why incumbent now on this subject?
First to emphasize that this context was provided and published (11/25/2001, "Libertatea" newspaper,
see posts from this address):
"I was thinking and at the possibility of avoiding the surgery. Is possible the local injection of a
substance that inhibits the nervous information flow in that area. Such kind of intervention may

simplify things", says surgeon Dorel Manu.

But mostly for that the logic of placement of immune system at the base of the processes
highlighted by Prehn and Main (which I couldn't totally dismantle until now) is wrong.
This is what finds also Dr. Curti in the above material: things are more complicated. There
are relationships between different processes which appear to be like a closed chain. Under
these conditions the positions of "cause" and "effect" are entirely relative: they keeps

changing. Proof on this behavior of processes is the Winn test:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3018371/
It shows that, at a linear evolution of ratio of quantity of immune reactants / quantity of
target" tissue, the growth process is nonlinear. I.e. the two values (the ratio and the growth)
keeps changing the role of "cause" (as in the case of x and y in a second degree equation: both
can take new values simultaneously and independently, so that may arise the situation in
which at one y value may be assigned two distinct values of x). It result that this connection
is not causal. So, it is controlled from the outside. And "outside" of the biochemical processes
can be only the electric signals.

Let's say it's just coincidence. But the most significant element passed unnoticed until now
(at least for me):

NOW PUTATIVELY IMMUNIZED ANIMALS.?!

What is this? They could be immunized but, as a researcher, you must don't have
preconceived ideas:
"In fact, the direct "observation" processes are completely ignored in an experiment.
Experiments are only protocols that lead to "cause" to "effect".
And the "cause" and the "effect" are arbitrarily chosen on the basis of "signals": the
objects and phenomena do not inherently contain these principles, to be find by an outside
"observer" only through observation. It is well-known the situation where objects and / or
phenomena have changed arbitrarily their status: from "cause" to "effect" and vice versa,
depending on the "theory" that it shape them. "Signals" perceived by many individuals (which
generates "conventions") have a role in this process.(timpul a disprut n 21.12.2012
(pag. 17), posted in Romanian).
And "immunization" must refer to a pathogen not to a process.
I.e. the term can possibly refer to METILCOLANTREN not to a tumor (the disease itself).
Don't remove the lung affected by tuberculosis for his reintroduction in the body but you
must do the immunization of the body against Mycobacterium tuberculosis.
http://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccin)
In other words, there it was exclusively about the denervated tumors, now "visible" to the
immune system. In this case the experiments of Prehn and Main are an incontestable proof of
effectiveness of treatment by the method of denervation of solid tumors. By this way, I
demand again the Ministry of Health to answer at my previous steps.
The subject of this is CANCER! No one has conducted experiments of the "tumor
GROWTH, IN VITRO, beginning only with the cells and/or healthy tissues", so they can say:
we know how evolves the mechanism of the cancer.
I am a diplomat engineer in physics at the University of Bucharest.
The concern for this disease is because I worked at the Cernavoda nuclear power plant. I
think my contacts with medical domain are very consistent. Furthermore, coming from
outside, my opinions are more likely to be correct.
So: My name is Gabriel Pascu. I'm from Romania. I created a theory that tries to link the
scientific formalism with the way it is generated: by the life form" in the first place and by

"intelligent life form", in the second row. The main issue of this theory is about a real and
formally accepted pattern for living systems.
So, the problem that I try to clear up is the fact that we can't create living forms (from amorf
forms) in conditions in which all the phenomenon (dynamic, chemical and physical) on living
forms can be individually reproducible by experiments or we could find them in nature. We
knows that theirs individually developing (out of organisms) are ruled by spatial and temporal
statistics laws. Or IN the organisms such phenomenon are coordinated and the statistics laws
are not functioning (the result of this coordination is precisely geometrical determined in
space-the stable form of the result of a holding of dynamic phenomenon-the organism). And
this precise determination is not a result of material (physical, chemical) actions (which are
governed by statistic laws). So, what is the cause of this determination? That's the question?
And the answer isn't "DNA" which is a scalar information (not geometrical oriented, which
means "vector"). So he can't generate a very precise 3D geometrical distribution of the result
of a dynamic process. In the same time the answer is not a religious one! It's a strictly
scientific answer!
It is suggested by "Franois Jacob, Logic of living, Romanian Encyclopedic Publishing House,
Bucharest, 1972, pp. 338:

Even if the injury (which produces cancer - my note) begins in the nucleus or cytoplasm,
or its origins are in a somatic mutation, or in the presence of a virus or a circuit disturbance,
everything that prevents cell to receiving a signal, can removing it outside of community.
Understanding cancer involves the entering in the logic of the system which imposes for the
cells the constraints of the body.
I have this answer!
But we talk here about physics, statistics, theory of information etc.
The method I found for healing the cancer is based on this answer and is good (is verified
illegally on peoples in Romania for many years)! The tumor is an independent organism (from
his host). He is intelligent, he can take decisions, he can adapt at specifics external stimulus
(treatments or action of immunologic system). This coordinated tip of behavior of malign
cells is facilitated by the connection of the tumor with the nerves of autonomic nervous
system (which offer a rich informational support and which exist- the connection- in all
situations, known or not by the medicine).
So, the principle of a method (for curing the cancer) is that: the tumor mast be isolated by the
influence of activity of the nerves (cutting the nerve or stopping the electrochemical signals
circulation influence from synapses to the tumor by activity of a neurotoxin-see American
patent: Pub. No. : US 2005/0031648 A1; Pub Date: Feb. 10, 2005).
Main and Prehn have performed such experiments in 1957 (they pull out the tumor and pull
in the same tumor to the same animal) with promising results. But they follow a different
theoretical idea (the existence of specific tumor antigens). The tumor it must stay there, after