I'm Still Here

And a Note Re: Coley's Toxins

Yes, I’m still here.

The past year was rough. I was involved in a life-changing accident from which I’m still recovering. And recently I was able to quit a job that, for the last 1.5 years, has sucked the life out of me.

The good news is that 2025 is looking up for me. Way up.

Winter is over here in Virginia, the daffodils are coming out, and I’m recovering my creative energy in just over a week of quitting my job. (I knew that would happen, which was one motivation for it.)

And I’m making plans for my future. This year will look radically different from last, and next year more different still as I execute my plans.

I’d like to write about Coley’s toxins again, but my creative energies are drawing me in a different direction in the short term.

In our attention-span-of-a-gerbil-theater-of-the-absurd, older information often falls into obscurity.

Therefore, for current utility as well as posterity, here are two formulations for Coley’s toxins that are in the public domain. Interested practitioners should obtain hard copies.

How to Make and Use Coley’s Toxins by Wayne Martin

The ReInvention of Coley’s Toxins by Don MacAdam

I’d be happy to discuss these formulations with interested individuals in a more private forum — but I am aware of individuals who are still alive who have used both formulations to fully and permanently eliminate cancer.

It has always been my belief that Coley’s toxins should not be centralized, monopolized, or patented, and I want to remind others that 130 years ago, all that was required to make this medicine was a basic knowledge of microbiology. That is knowledge that is today possessed by most graduate students or even advanced undergraduates.

Buyers of the above book of Don MacAdam’s should also be aware that there is a mathematical error in it, which I personally discussed with the author many years before he died.

Below is that correspondence.

Happy almost spring, my friends!

From: Monica Hughes [mailto:m.hughes@huiabiologics.nz]
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2018 11:41 PM
To: Don MacAdam
Subject: calculations

Hi Don,

In prep for the first batches I've been going over your protocol, in particular the calculations in Steps 8.9 for the dry weight determination of Serratia.

I am wondering what if you mean g/mL rather than mg/mL in the following statement: "NOTE: If the average dry weight is less than 0.0071 the vaccine cannot be compounded and the batch is canceled."

This seems like an impossibly small number and I am wondering if you mean 0.0071 g/mL, as opposed to 0.0071 mg/mL.

Here is my reasoning. At the end of creating the slurry, the mixture should be rather high in wet weight of Serratia, somewhere around 0.45 g/mL or 450 mg/mL. It seems reasonable that the sample would dry down to around 1.5% of that weight (7.1mg), but 0.0015% seems impossibly small, and 0.0071mg is not a mass that one could measure on an analytical balance with accuracy to 0.1 mg in any case.

Based on your later calculations with regard to total batch volume, it seems as if one would ideally have about 25mg/mL Serratia dry weight and around 70mL of the slurry to compound with (or equivalent values leading to a similar product).

Sorry to be a wet blanket if I've uncovered a typo in your book, but please advise as I want to make sure I'm getting it correct. :)

Monica Hughes, PhD

Chief Executive and Technical Officer

On 10/6/2018 at 4:33 AM, "Don MacAdam" <donmacadam@kwic.com> wrote:

Hi Monica,

Not only are you correct but you have once again demonstrated you are the right person to do this!

The calculations on p217 specify mg/ml but the bolded warning about 0.0071 is g/ml.

I just did the calculations one more time:

The average dry weight of the Serratia suspension has to be less greater than 0.0070875 g/ml or 7.0875 mg/ml or else the batch cannot be compounded.

The final vaccine contains 1.89 mg/ml Serratia.

The final vaccine is compounded by volume of 2/3 (10/15) Sp broth culture at 0.600 OD plus 1/15 glycerol therefore a maximum of 4/15 of the total volume is Sm (plus water if necessary to make up the volume).

(The above is not exactly correct because glycerol is miscible in water thus the total volume of Sp broth plus glycerol is a little less than the sum of the imputs, but that’s not important because the difference in volume is small and the point of the exercise is to follow the same procedure each time in order to reduce batch-to-batch variations.)

This total volume of Sp must contain at least ((1.89 mg/ml / (4/15)) = 7.0875 mg of dry weight Serratia.

Thus if the Serratia slurry contains less DW than this amount the batch cannot be compounded.

Note: the reason for this dictum is to prevent the impulse to “save the batch” by compensating for lower dry weight Serratia by diluting the Sp by a corresponding amount (resulting in a weaker vaccine).

Don