Invisible Illness Awareness Week 2016: Our Voices Need to Be Heard
Never heard of Invisible Illness Awareness Week? You're not alone. Jody Smith sheds a little light to make it more visible
Discuss the article on the Forums.

GcMAF plus antivirals. A good idea?

Discussion in 'GcMAF' started by serg1942, Jun 27, 2011.

  1. serg1942

    serg1942 Senior Member

    Some were discussing this subject privately, and we've thought it would be more useful to discuss it here:

    FROU: what is famvir? And was KDM who prescribed it? For what and why?

    RE: B12, my opinion is that it causes detoxification, and this means a mild acute intoxication, and this make us weaker, and therefore theres a flare up of the infections My conclusion here is that we have to try not to detoxify if it worsens us, and focus first in reducing the viral load.

    I am taking 2 mls of Nexavir daily. I know it is causing some die-off symptoms, but I have not reduced it because my PcPr test was extremely low, meaning I have many prions, and I think Nexavir can reverse this situation.

    RRR: As far as I understand (I think Frou knows some studies that maybe add other properties to Nexavir, that I forgot to read!), Nexavir is not an antiviral per se, because it is a complex of peptides, so its main function is to replace the spoiled proteins (including misfolded proteins or prions) specially on the cell surface, preventing this way the entrance of viruses or intracellular bacteria. So yes, it has antiviral properties, but it does not inhibit any viral enzyme or viral process, so in this sense it doesnt work as an antiviral. Also it has not side effects as is not a drug, but natural peptides. Finally, it is not a specific antiviral, so probably it works better over some viruses than over others.

    So, if GcMAF has the property of reactivating virus, this is great! It is exactly what we were trying when we were researching chemo in order to clean up the reservoirs Also, for our immune system to be more effective, we need the virus to show, in other words, to reactivate. This is my understanding.

    Why to take other antivirals? Well, we already know that antivirals on their own do not work very well, and for sure not in the long term, because they are toxic.

    BUT, it does make perfect sense to me that we need specific antivirals in order to help the stimulated immune system by GcMAF. It is the same idea behind treating gut bacteria with antibiotics while on GcMAF The ABX should be more efficient when taking GcMAF, than without taking it. Going farther, I think KDM is going to try GcMAF together with Ampligen, and it may be a very wise idea!

    IN SHORT: we are stimulating the immune system by taking GcMAF, and its a very good idea, and even can be necessary for certain infections, to be addressed directly with either ABX or antivirals, in the meanwhile. We will be helping the work of GcMAF.

    So, I dont see any problem here but the other way around.

  2. Sushi

    Sushi Moderation Resource Albuquerque

    Hi Sergio,

    Glad you opened this topic. It does make sense that if we are finding benefit for targeting specific bacterial infections with ABX while on GcMAF, we might also benefit from using the right antiviral while on GcMAF.

    I was very surprised at the synergistic action of Xifaxin along with GcMAF. By improving gut function (by killing off an infection), we should be able to deal more effectively with the "intoxication" that is being created by some other elements of the protocol--such as B12.

    Likewise, if we can reduce viral load (with an antiviral) while on GcMAF, we might better tolerate the sometimes bumpy ride some of us experience with GcMAF.

    We are pioneers here so I am glad we are sharing our experiences and our thoughts about them.

  3. Rrrr

    Rrrr Senior Member


    thanks for opening this thread of discussion.
  4. froufox


    Hi Sergio & everyone,

    I wish i had your optimism Serg! ;-) Maybe u are right and this is all what is meant to be happening but i guess because ive had much more of a rocky ride with the GcMAF its hard for me to feel confident that what is happening is healing....feels more like harming sometimes! :confused:

    Famvir is an KDM didnt prescribe it i just started taking it off my own bat last yr and it seemed to help me straightaway with cognitive symptoms but as i mentioned on the other thread the improvements diminished in the end. Whether it will work any better now that im on GcMAF & Nexavir who knows...i just started taking it on impulse the other day as intuitively i just felt "virusy". I think im feeling a bit better brainwise since i started it, but its been 10 days since my last GcMAF injection and i usually start to feel a bit better then anyway, or rather less crap lol, so cud be that too. Anyway ive booked a phone consult with KDM next month so it will be interesting to see hear what he says.

    I can't seem to tolerate the B12 at all, even just 1 drop makes me feel worse for a few days so im obviously highly sensitive to its effects, which i agree is presumably due to stirring up methylation.

    As u know i have the prion problem too tho not as badly as u...the Nexavir does seem to help me a on 1ml a day.

  5. mojoey

    mojoey Senior Member

    I hope you are right Sergio. It would be great to take something other than chemo to stimulate the viruses out of the reservoirs. I just don't understand how gcmaf would do this considering its mechanism of action. Macrophages pretty much engulf pathogens right?

    In the case of low-dose chemo, the introduction of a foreign, toxic substance somehow speeds up HIV's already fast rate of mutation and causes it to mutate out of existence. It may have a similar mechanism of action as VDA:

    The Viral Decay Acceleration (used by the drug KP1461) approach actually incorporates nucleotide analogs through the cell's own reverse transcriptase enzyme, and this causes bases to pair ambiguously, directly messing up the viral RNA and thus causing it to mutate out of existence.

    Zolinza, another approach, targets an enzyme called histone deacetylase (HDAC) that helps HIV go to sleep in cells by interfering with its ability to replicate. By blocking HDAC, Zolinza reactivates the virus, kickstarting reproduction.

    So any analogous approach involves either directly or indirectly speeding up its mutation to cause it to die. How does gcmaf fit into this picture?

    It seems much more logical to me that gcmaf would reactivate viruses because it induces chronic, nonspecific, and systemic inflammation in patients whom mostly already have elevated inflammation, resulting in a disturbed terrain which may actually become hospitable for reactivation of viruses (worst-case scenario). I keep coming back to this because I just dont see why else this would work on HIV patients and not CFS patients if we both have retroviruses. It doesn't seem to be the case that gcmaf wouldn't work on our pathogens because our immune systems are more deficient, since that's very much how HIV works. The most important differentiation does not seem to be the type of retrovirus that we have, but rather that the type of chronic inflammation seem in ME/CFS is not present in AIDS or cancer. I think if it works on HIV it should work on any retrovirus in a vacuum, but the fact is our preexisting terrain must be taken into consideration.

    Let's not forget the fact gcmaf was successfully used to treat reactivated herpes infection and lyme disease as a standalone treatment, and in this case it is causing the very problem it was used to treat. Once again, the major difference seems to be our chronic inflammation.

    The other explanation is that it causes the immune system to start recognizing the pathogens which then makes it seem like the viruses are reactivated when in reality it's mostly our immune system that's reactivated (best-case scenario.)
  6. slayadragon

    slayadragon Senior Member


    I'm of the increasing belief that we are unable to treat the infections because of the toxins stored in the body, and that until the "terrain" is detoxified substantially, killing the bugs is a lost cause.

    Unfortunately, detoxing is not something that can be done in a day. It requires a lot of work and time, and (in my strong opinion) can only be done in a fairly pristine location.

    I agree with Frou that stirring up toxins (through any means) puts stress on the system, making it harder to kill the pathogens. But for people who are quite toxic already (meaning, I suspect, all people with moderate to severe ME/CFS), killing pathogens without detoxing first is not going to be successful in getting people any better.

    Of the people I've interviewed and observed ("mostly recovered" from long-term severe ME/CFS), all of them have done a mix of: get to a good location, detox the terrain and then carefully kill the bugs. I'm definitely interested in counterexamples though.

    I agree with this, based on what I know so far.

    Best, Lisa
  7. cansado


    FYI: B12 has been taken off my protocol, and I KDM won't tell me exactly why. My H2S levels have gone up considerably so it probably has something to do with toxicity?

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page