From: Integrity Research Institute []
Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2011 8:10 PM
Subject: Future Energy eNews
IRI Banner

              October 2011

Dear Subscriber,


We have a great Fifth International Conference on Future Energy coming up and look forward to your continued support. It is important to announce that I have been appointed the Conference Coordinator and Technical and Publications Chairperson for the SPESIF-COFE5 event coming up February 29 to March 2, 2012.  Many of the deadlines now are much more flexible (send in your abstract for energy, propulsion or bioenergetics topic for consideration even up until the end of 2011). It also means that IRI will consider a group of papers, without a physical presence requirement. We are planning to offer Webcasting of the event as well as a Remote Presentation capability for those who cannot make the trip but would like to present over the Internet. This is a vital and important energy conference folks. All of the quality papers from COFE4 that were generously this year are now online.  View ALL of the SPESIF2011 and COFE4 papers and download ANY of them for FREE (pdf): Physics Procedia - ScienceDirect (c) Elsevier B.V.  Elsevier Science has been contracted for COFE4 and COFE5 to replace the American Institute of Physics publisher. We feel that Elsevier is better in many regards and also most importantly, embraces all of the energy topics that we entertain.


Looking at our top story, IRI consulted one of the world's experts in Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR) to get his opinion of the Rossi development. It is worthwhile to note that Dr. George Miley has equaled the Rossi performance and is well known in the field for many years.


The Venture Capital article can be a resource guide for those doing research. The article looking on the bright side of solar energy after Solyndra is also very valuable for predicting future energy trends, as well as the last article on recharging a battery in ten minutes.


For those bioenergy fans, who keep asking us for more articles on the topic,  we want to emphasize the significance of the #5 article that announces, "Cancer Craves Killer Free Radicals". If ever there was a reason to boost your electronic antioxidants throughout the day, we believe that this is one of the most convincing. Furthermore, IRI has developed, under Dr. Jacqueline Panting's direction, "Therapeutic Electronics Antioxidant Clothing" (patent pending) which answers the concerned senior citizen's need for daily free radical protection far exceeding pills or potions. This is because electrons are antioxidants. See for more details of the solution to the free radical disease and aging threat.  



Thomas Valone, PhD, PE  Editor   


IRI website QR Code IRI website QR Code
and save 30%



1) Several Scientists Achieving Success with LENR   

Integrity Research Institute Press Release  October 2011    


Ed.Note: Many scientists have been diligently working on Low Energy Nuclear Reactions for years and lately their efforts seem to be paying off.  Andrea Rossi from ECat is getting quite a bit of media attention, but there are many others.  Among them,  Dr George Miley, Professor Emeritus at University of Illinois. Dr. Miley is internationally known for his pioneering research in condensed matter nuclear science, for which he received the Preparata Medal 2006-2007 and the 1996 Edward Teller Medal for ICF research. He is a Guggenheim Fellow and a Senior NATO Fellow.  He received the 2006 "Integrity in Science" Award from our Institute.  


IRI website QR Code
Dr Miley receiving the 'Integrity In Research"Award from Dr Valone  at COFE2 
We contacted, Dr Miley, fresh from presenting his latest paper at the World Green Energy Conference  to give us an update on the work being performed by his team which includes a  Postdoc and 5 students. 


Dr. Miley states: " Yes, we are getting some good gas loading results at the 100s of watt level!!   

Basically we fill a pressure tube with about20 g of nanoparticles and then open a valve to quickly pressurize with D2 (or H2) up to 4 ATM. The particles start heating  due to the exothermic heat of adsorption. Then a some point the LENR reactions are triggered adding additional heating. The system will eventual come to an equilibrium condition with the heat source being the LENR reactions. If the gas pressure is released, the temperature would normally drop due to the endothermic effect of desorption of the gas, but the LENR heat effect actually continues for a time due to the gas flux and remaining  loading in the nanoparticles. This causes a temperature rise followed by a slow drop off. However, we still have much to do to confirm and fully understand these results. Plus we need to work on the nano-particle production to be sure we have reproducible particles - and operation. We have been considering (along with others) commercializing small 100 W units rapidly in order to get this into the open and change public attitudes. (others at the WGES meeting were pushing for much larger commercial units for specific applications). However, we have not yet had time to give much thought to the engineering design a practical unit. Our current lab unit has excellent vacuum pumps, heating-cooling controls, etc. which would not be on a "market" type sealed unit. Also, we need to consider  liability issues (the combination of hydrogen and nanoparticles = a potential but manageable risk) plus some low level radioactivity".


Another very important target is to develop a 3 kW energy to replace the Pu239 heat source in Radioisotopic Thermoelectric Generators  used by NASA in almost all space probes to date. LENR unit scale very nicely heat wise vs. Pu239, but has minimum radioactivity and a very log operational time with adequate gas supply. NASA scientists at NASA Glenn Labs who work on RTGs have expressed great interest in this possibility.

Success for Andrea Rossi's E-Cat

IRI website QR Code
Andrea Rossi. Photo Courtesy

Against all the odds, Andrea Rossi's E-Cat cold fusion power plant passed its biggest test yesterday, producing an average of 470 kilowatts for more than five hours. (A technical glitch prevented it from achieving a megawatt as originally planned). The demonstration was monitored closely by engineers from Rossi's mysterious US customer, which was evidently satisfied and paid up.


The energy was output in the form of heat, measured by the quantity of water boiled off. The results are reported in NyTeknik and Pure Energy Systems News, who both had reporters present for the test. Associated Press also sent a correspondent who should be filing a story in the next few days (one suspects his editors might have some questions).


But this does not mean we can crack open the champagne and celebrate the end of fossil fuels quite yet. Skeptics have plenty of grounds to doubt whether the new test really takes us any further forwards.

For a start, the US customer remains anonymous. In other words, a group of unknown, unverifiable people carried out tests which cannot be checked.


Secondly, observers apart from the customer were only allowed to view the test for a few minutes at a time and during the entire test the E-Cat remained connected to a power supply by a cable. The external power was supposedly turned off; as a demonstration it would have been more impressive for the reactor in its shipping container to be visibly disconnected while operating.


The successful test should pave the way for further work at the University of Bologna, and more contracts with the enigmatic customer. NyTeknik did discover one possible clue to their identity. The customer's controller, one Domenico Fioravanti, apparently reports to a man whose title is "Colonel". This suggests that the mystery customer might be DARPA, the Pentagon's extreme science wing which, as has previously noted, has expressed interest in Rossi's work -- but which might not be quite ready to explain to its political masters why it spent millions on a cold fusion device.


Plenty of mysteries remain. But the game just got a lot more interesting.

Don't miss: The history of Rossi's E-Cat 



Many other scientists have been working for over 20 years to successfully bring LENR-Cold Fusion to market.  Below are some links for further information.
Rossi's October 28 tests by Pure Energy Systems

Cold Fusion Times, edited By Dr Mitchell Swartz  


NUCAT energy  



SPAWAR/US Navy Report Supports Cold Fusion  



2)  Absolute Speed Barrier Broken by CERN  

By Associated Press, Updated: Thursday, September 22, 5:59 PM


Ed. Note: This discovery opens the door for discussion of other objects exceeding the speed of light. See IRI Report "Faster Than Light" for reference articles on this important subject. -TV


CERN project at Geneva, Switzerland 

GENEVA - One of the very pillars of physics and Einstein's theory of relativity - that nothing can go faster than the speed of light - was rocked Thursday by new findings from one of the world's foremost laboratories.

European researchers said they clocked an oddball type of subatomic particle called a neutrino going faster than the 186,282 miles per second that has long been considered the cosmic speed limit.


The claim was met with skepticism, with one outside physicist calling it the equivalent of saying you have a flying carpet. In fact, the researchers themselves are not ready to proclaim a discovery and are asking other physicists to independently try to verify their findings.


"The feeling that most people have is this can't be right, this can't be real," said James Gillies, a spokesman for the European Organization for Nuclear Research, or CERN, which provided the particle accelerator that sent neutrinos on their breakneck 454-mile trip underground from Geneva to Italy.

Going faster than light is something that is just not supposed to happen according to Einstein's 1905 special theory of relativity - the one made famous by the equation E equals mc2. But no one is rushing out to rewrite the science books just yet.

Albert Einstein
Einstein at a Lecture on the Speed of Light in 1934.

It is "a revolutionary discovery if confirmed," said Indiana University theoretical physicist Alan Kostelecky, who has worked on this concept for a quarter of a century.

Stephen Parke, who is head theoretician at the Fermilab near Batavia, Ill., and was not part of the research, said: "It's a shock. It's going to cause us problems, no doubt about that - if it's true."


Even if these results are confirmed, they won't change at all the way we live or the way the world works. After all, these particles have presumably been speed demons for billions of years. But the finding will fundamentally change our understanding of how the universe operates, physicists said.


Einstein's special relativity theory, which says that energy equals mass times the speed of light squared, underlies "pretty much everything in modern physics," said John Ellis, a theoretical physicist at CERN who was not involved in the experiment. "It has worked perfectly up until now."




France's National Institute for Nuclear and Particle Physics Research collaborated with Italy's Gran Sasso National Laboratory on the experiment at CERN.


CERN reported that a neutrino beam fired from a particle accelerator near Geneva to a lab 454 miles (730 kilometers) away in Italy traveled 60 nanoseconds faster than the speed of light. Scientists calculated the margin of error at just 10 nanoseconds, making the difference statistically significant.

Given the enormous implications of the find, the researchers spent months checking and rechecking their results to make sure there were no flaws in the experiment.


A team at Fermilab had similar faster-than-light results in 2007, but a large margin of error undercut its scientific significance. If anything is going to throw a cosmic twist into Einstein's theories, it's not surprising that it's the strange particles known as neutrinos. These are odd slivers of an atom that have confounded physicists for about 80 years.


The neutrino has almost no mass, comes in three different "flavors," may have its own antiparticle and has been seen shifting from one flavor to another while shooting out from our sun, said physicist Phillip Schewe, communications director at the Joint Quantum Institute in Maryland.


Dario Auterio and Antonio Ereditato of the OPERA experiment.

Columbia University physicist Brian Greene, author of the book "Fabric of the Cosmos," said neutrinos theoretically can travel at different speeds depending on how much energy they have. And some mysterious particles whose existence is still only theorized could be similarly speedy, he said.


Fermilab team spokeswoman Jenny Thomas, a physics professor at the University College of London, said there must be a "more mundane explanation" for the European findings. She said Fermilab's experience showed how hard it is to measure accurately the distance, time and angles required for such a claim.


Nevertheless, the Fermilab team, which shoots neutrinos from Chicago to Minnesota, will go back to work immediately to try to verify or knock down the new findings, Thomas said.


And that's exactly what the team in Geneva wants.


Gillies told The Associated Press that the readings have so astounded researchers that "they are inviting the broader physics community to look at what they've done and really scrutinize it in great detail, and ideally for someone elsewhere in the world to repeat the measurements."


Drew Baden, chairman of the physics department at the University of Maryland, said it is far more likely that there are measurement errors or some kind of fluke. Tracking neutrinos is very difficult, he said.

"This is ridiculous what they're putting out," Baden said, calling it the equivalent of claiming that a flying carpet is invented only to find out later that there was an error in the experiment somewhere. "Until this is verified by another group, it's flying carpets. It's cool, but ..."


So if the neutrinos are pulling this fast one on Einstein, how can it happen? Parke said there could be a cosmic shortcut through another dimension - physics theory is full of unseen dimensions - that allows the neutrinos to beat the speed of light.


Indiana's Kostelecky theorizes that there are situations when the background is different in the universe, not perfectly symmetrical as Einstein says. Those changes in background may change both the speed of light and the speed of neutrinos.


But that doesn't mean Einstein's theory is ready for the trash heap, he said. "I don't think you're going to ever kill Einstein's theory. You can't. It works," Kostelecky said. Just there are times when an additional explanation is needed, he said.


If the European findings are correct, "this would change the idea of how the universe is put together," Columbia's Greene said. But he added: "I would bet just about everything I hold dear that this won't hold up to scrutiny."


Borenstein reported from Washington.


3) Venture Capital for Energy Innovation 


Energy Business Reports, October, 2011,


Ed. Note: While this may be an expensive report for most readers, the list of venture capital firms in the Table of Contents below is invaluable. For example, I have met Vinod Kholsa and read his articles in Scientific American and elsewhere. He knows what he wants yet is open-minded for that breakthrough energy discovery. - TV



2010 Worldwide Renewable Energy Investment Skyrockets 32% to US$211 Billion


  With the rise of alternative energy companies, there are a large number of venture capitalists investing in the energy industry, particularly in companies specializing in renewable energy. And for the first time, the developing world has overtaken richer countries in new investment.

Venture Capital for Energy Innovation assesses growth opportunities in the alternative energy, energy efficiency, and carbon reduction sectors among leading startup firms. Funding opportunities with a guide to angel investment, technical assistance, and incubator facilities is also provided.

This research report analyzes the growing venture capital investments in the renewable energy industry. The report profiles the leading venture capitalists who are investing in the energy industry, along with an analysis of the market, the investments attracted by major companies in this industry, along with the challenges faced by VCs investing in renewable energy.

The National Venture Capital Association categorizes the cleantech sector as ventures involving alternative energy, energy efficiency, and environmental controls. But energy innovation investing is not limited to just the clean tech sector.

Recent VC-funded energy innovations include algae-based biofuels, cellulosic ethanol, concentrator-based solar power generation, cylindrical solar panels, electro- chemical energy storage systems, energy storage systems for wind farms, enhanced geothermal systems, LED light bulbs, low-cost photovoltaic cells, modular-scale nuclear power generation, municipal waste-to-biofuel conversion, small-scale hydrogen generators for fuel-cell vehicles, tidal turbine generators, and wave energy generating systems.

4) Beyond Solyndra,  Ten Reasons why Solar will Win
Doug Payne,Guest Contributor, Solar Tech, September 29, 2011, RMI Outlet,
Ed. Note: Ironically, one could argue it was the explosion of the solar industry and the falling price of silicon solar modules that played a big role in Solyndra's demise. -TV


By now the financial, political, and emotional fallout from the recent Solyndra bankruptcy filing is running at full tilt. Print, online, and social media channels are filled with the appropriate questions about what happened -- who's responsible, who's accountable, and who's going to pay for it? Incumbent energy providers, including coal and oil, along with many politicians are cynically rushing to tout this event as the beginning of the end for renewable energy, while others see Solyndra's collapse as merely a singular event that is part of an inevitable macro-trend toward a 21st century clean economy.


However, in reality, Solyndra was not the entire solar industry. It was just a manufacturer and supplier to the industry. Citing Solyndra as a grave indicator of the end of the solar industry is like noting that the demise of Goodyear would end the auto industry. As long as solar makes economic sense; systems will continue to be deployed.


So how about we all take a breath, step back, and look at what's happening in the bigger picture that is the global energy business.

There are no silver solar bullets to America's energy needs -- but there is solar buckshot.


Solar Buckshot, aka Top 10 Reasons Why Solar Energy Will Win  


10. A job is a job is a job.

With all this talk about green jobs, clean jobs, and other kinds of jobs -- how about we just call it a job? A job that puts food on the table, pays the bills, keeps the kids in clothes, and affords the occasional family night out. And, if you subscribe to the belief that all is lost due to the Chinese PV manufacturing juggernaut, keep in mind that you can't export the thousands of business development, sales, design, engineering, installation, and service jobs we're going to need every year.

But opinion only matters if the data supports it. Solar is one of the only industries adding private sector jobs in our struggling economy -- with 6.8 percent growth from August 2010 to August 2011, when overall U.S. job growth was only 0.7 percent and when fossil fuel generators actually cut jobs by 2 percent. It's estimated the United States already has over 90,000 direct and indirect jobs in the manufacturing and installation of solar panels. That's more than in either steel production or coal mining (not including transportation and power plant employment).


9. Fastest growing sector of the economy.

Growth is a good for everyone. U.S. solar photovoltaic installation increased by an impressive average annual rate of 64 percent between 2005 and 2010, with over 70 percent of the value of solar products and installations produced here at home. Solar is already up and delivering in 21 states, representing two-thirds of America's population.   

8. The voters are ahead of the politicians and the media.

Despite what you hear from political ideologues and read about in the news, Americans want more homegrown, renewable, clean energy. They want it not only because it will make the air they breathe cleaner, but because they know that competition for their money is a good thing and that economic growth will come with the continued growth of a homegrown industry. Americans are also tired of borrowing money from China to pay for energy we import from many countries that are not our friends.


7. It is about prices.

Solar energy is already affordable in many states and cities. A new report by Lawrence Berkeley Labs (LBL) shows how rapidly solar prices are falling. In its analysis, LBL shows that the average cost of installed solar photovoltaic was $6.20/watt for systems installed in 2010, falling 17 percent from 2009 and 43 percent below 1998. Prices fell an additional 11 percent from 2010 to the first half of 2011. Since 2008, panel prices alone have declined 61 percent, with 30 percent of this reduction happening this year. Large commercial rooftops systems are now being installed for less than $3 per watt DC -- approaching the SunShot goals set by DOE only this year. So in case you've missed it, "solar past does not equal solar present." Solar is rapidly reaching the point where it competes with traditional energy on price -- even without the kind of taxpayer subsidies that coal and natural gas have received for decades.


6. Follow the (private) money.

Even in a struggling economy, the clean energy industry drew a record $7.8 billion in venture capital worldwide in 2010, a 28 percent increase compared to 2009. Seventy percent of that world total was invested right here in North America. Solar alone received more than 30 percent of U.S. clean tech venture capital in the first quarter of 2011, indicating a maturing industry that is expected to continue growing.

5. Existing policies will make solar energy affordable for millions Americans by 2015.  


As Emperor Hadrian of Rome said, "Brick by brick, my citizens, brick by brick." In seven years, the solar industry has come a long way very quickly. Forty-three states have adopted a net-metering policy, which simply means that utilities don't have to replace their antiquated software and hardware to accommodate homes and businesses that produce extra power they loan to the grid during peak times of the day. Consumers (homes and businesses) make money for every bit of excess solar production that they don't use themselves. Instead, their utility buys it at the full retail rate. The small business owner, school, or family gets to pocket the difference.


4. A truly competitive free market favors solar over the oil and coal welfare queens.

Solar and other renewables will succeed, despite a national energy playing field tilted towards the oil, gas, and coal industries, which continue to benefit from 70 years of embedded incentives, subsidies, and deductions worth $20 billion a year. In other words, we are paying these guys twice -- once at the pump and electric meter and again when we pay our taxes. The single biggest energy subsidy, worth some $2.2 billion per year, goes to the oil industry -- and doesn't even support domestic production.

Don't blame roustabouts, roughnecks, and drillers. It's not their fault. But if you ask a senior oil and gas company executive, CFO, or Director if they're willing to give up these incentives and compete on a level playing field in a truly competitive, open market, what do you think they would they say? How about we find out? On the other hand, the solar industry has already declared that they will allow their 30 percent tax credit to expire in 2016 -- pretty generous, huh?


3. Our military loves it.

Our soldiers and sailors already know. The Department of Defense's clean energy investments increased 300 percent between 2006 and 2009, from $400 million to $1.2 billion, and they are projected to eclipse $10 billion annually by 2030. Why? Because sun and wind -- not gas stations -- can be found deep in the Afghani mountains, in the Iraqi desert, and on the high seas. When combined with brilliant new battery technologies that store energy when the wind is not blowing and the sun is not shining, our military has the energy and fuel it needs wherever it goes -- rather than waiting for huge, vulnerable tanker convoys.


2 . Solar in a box.

That's right, folks. We love solar because homes and businesses will soon be winning on price and quality through simple, affordable "solar-in-a-box" deliveries right to your home. These mass produced, "air conditioner/satellite dish/water heater" installations could be producing the equivalent of one nuclear power plant to the grid per year.


1. Solar will win because we love our nuclear power plant: the one, the only, the original...93 million miles away.

These are just ten reasons why renewable energy will win -- and why historians and economists will record Solyndra's failure as merely a footnote in the story of our transformation from dirty, often imported, fossil fuel energy to cleaner, homegrown renewable energy.

*** This article is a joint effort of the solar industry supergroup of:   

Doug Payne--Co-Founder / Executive Director  

SolarTech Donnie Fowler--CEO, Dogpatch Strategies   

Danny Kennedy--Founder / President,Sungevity   

Ned Harvey--COO, Rocky Mountain Institute SolarTech Board member   

Tom McCalmont--CEO McCalmont Engineering, Co-Founder/Board Chair SolarTech   

Jigar Shah--Founder SunEdison, CEO Carbon War Room

Originally published on      




5) Cancer Craves Killer Free Radicals
Linda Geddes , New Scientist 2830. September 15, 2011 

Ed. Note: It is interesting that antioxidants to fight free radicals is becoming more important. IRI has discovered "electronic antioxidants" are even more effective than pills


FOR 80 years we have misunderstood the feeding habits of cancer. It's a controversial suggestion that, if correct, could open up a host of alternative ways to fight the killer disease, and may even mean that in some circumstances chemotherapy drugs promote tumour growth rather than inhibit it.

In the 1930s, Otto Warburg suggested that cancer cells produce the bulk of their energy by breaking down glucose in the absence of oxygen, a process called glycolysis. The Warburg effect, as it is called, is now widely accepted in cancer research. It is also incorrect, according to Michael Lisanti at the Kimmel Cancer Center in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

 IRI website QR Code

Lisanti thinks that when a cell turns cancerous it begins to spew out hydrogen peroxide. The free radicals this generates cause oxidative damage that prompts support cells in the connective tissue around the cancer cells to begin digesting themselves (see diagram). Once these support cells, called fibroblasts, have consumed the mitochondria that normally provide their energy, they switch to glycolysis. The cancer cells then feed off the nutrients glycolysis generates.


"It's the Warburg effect, but in the wrong place," says Lisanti, who presented the idea earlier this month at the Strategies for Engineered Negligible Senescence meeting in Cambridge, UK. "Cancer cells can feed off normal cells as a parasite." In fact, he says, cells infected with malaria behave in much the same way. "The malaria parasite enters cells, induces oxidative stress, and gets free food" by feeding off the structures inside host cells that self-digest as a result of the stress.


"The importance of the micro-environment is something that has been gaining recognition over the last few years," says Nic Jones of the Paterson Institute in Manchester, and chief scientist for Cancer Research UK. "This adds a very important and exciting twist, where the communication between the cancer cell and the fibroblast fuels the development of the tumour."


This form of "metabolic coupling" also mirrors the way in which the epithelial cells that make up the skin and the surface of the body's organs produce hydrogen peroxide during wound healing. In doing so they rally immune cells to repair the damage - but in cancer the signal is never turned off. "Cancer is a wound that doesn't heal, because it keeps on producing hydrogen peroxide," says Lisanti.


He has experimental data to support his radical idea. When his team cultured breast cancer cells alongside fibroblasts for five days, they spotted the cancer cells releasing hydrogen peroxide on day two. By day five, most free radicals generated by the hydrogen peroxide were found inside the fibroblasts (Cell Cycle, DOI: 10.4161/cc.9.16.12553). The team also found a reduction in mitochondrial activity in fibroblasts, consistent with the cells self-destructing. There was also an increase in glucose uptake by the fibroblasts - a sign of glycolysis (Cell Cycle, DOI: 10.4161/cc.10.15.16585).


Lisanti is now gathering evidence to find out whether his ideas can be applied to many cancers or just a few. He has discovered a "marker" to identify patients in whom the metabolic coupling is occurring: as the fibroblasts are destroyed they stop producing a protein called caveolin-1. Lisanti has recorded a drop in caveolin-1 levels in 40 to 50 per cent of patients with breast cancer, and loss of the protein correlates with early tumour recurrence, metastasis, and resistance to the drug, tamoxifen (Breast Cancer Research, DOI: 10.1186/bcr2892). He also has evidence for caveolin-1 loss in prostate cancer. Those results suggest that new cancer therapies based around Lisanti's ideas might be possible (see "The cells that die so cancer can live").


Lisanti believes the reason Warburg got it wrong is because he looked at cancer cells in isolation, rather than in co-culture with fibroblasts.

"The provocative use of the term 'reverse Warburg' is certainly catchy," says Chi Van Dang of Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland - but it ignores some important observations. For example, many previous studies have found increased glycolysis in cancer cells.

Lisanti's model also runs into problems when taking the long view. "If these [fibroblasts] are sacrificing themselves so that the cancer can eat, sooner or later they are going to be completely depleted. And that doesn't happen," says Ian Hart of Barts Cancer Institute in London, UK. It is possible that tumours recruit stem cells from the bone marrow to replace the fibroblasts, but Hart says more evidence is needed to confirm this.


However, if Lisanti is correct, his ideas could also explain why people become more susceptible to cancer as they age. More than 100 years ago, Steven Paget proposed that cancer cells are seeds that need the correct micro-environment in which to grow. "What we're now saying is that the hydrogen peroxide is the fertiliser," says Lisanti. "As you age, your body produces more hydrogen peroxide and free radicals and becomes a fertile ground for cancer."

The cells that die so cancer can live

For decades, cancer therapies have focused on destroying cancer cells and ignored the healthy cells tumours also contain. The discovery that cancer cells form a parasitic relationship with the "nest" of fibroblasts or support tissue that surrounds the tumour may therefore open up other opportunities for treating the disease.

"So far, all mainstream cancer therapies are aimed at [removing] these transformed cells," says Ian Hart of Barts Cancer Institute in London, UK. "Rather than killing every last tumour cell, let's modify the [fibroblasts]."

In his model, Michael Lisanti at the Kimmel Center in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, proposes that cancer cells use hydrogen peroxide to strike up their metabolic relationship with the fibroblasts. The chemical generates free radicals in the fibroblasts, kick-starting a self-digestion process which frees up nutrients to fuel cancer growth. His team found that treating cancer cells with catalase, an enzyme that destroys hydrogen peroxide, triggered a five0fold increase in cancer cell death, possibly by cutting off the cells' fuel supply.

This raises the prospect of treating cancer with antioxidants, which mop up free radicals. However, although some studies hint that antioxidants may be beneficial, particularly for cancer prevention, the results have often been disappointing, says Hart.

Killer free radicals

Lisanti thinks that's because most chemotherapies work by generating lethal doses of free radicals to kill the cancer cells, which would cancel out the effects of any antioxidant treatments. He believes we need trials of antioxidants alone, rather than in combination with chemotherapy.

If he is correct it is also possible that in some situations, chemotherapy might help cancer spread by making more fuel available to the cancer cells.


"Conventional chemotherapy saved my father from colon cancer, but when it does not work, you get recurrence and metastasis," says Lisanti. "There is a lot of luck involved here, ensuring that you got just the right dose."


Hart believes a more promising approach might be to target specific molecules that enable cross-talk between cancer cells and fibroblasts.


One possibility is using drugs that block "autophagy", the process by which the fibroblasts self-digest and release nutrients that then fuel cancer growth. The malaria drug, chloroquine, works in this way, so could also be tested against cancer, says Lisanti.


Drugs that inhibit the ability of mitochondria to burn lactate and other products of glycolysis may also serve to cut off the tumour's food supply. One such drug is metformin, widely prescribed to treat diabetes. Indeed, several recent studies have suggested that people taking metformin have a reduced risk of developing cancer (Gastroenterology, DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2009.04.013).


For similar stories, visit the Cancer Topic Guide.


back to table of contents 



6) Recharging the Battery in 10 Minutes! 
David Zax 10/05/2011, Technology Review.

A new technology could take a lot of the sting out of waiting to recharge your smart phone.



NTT Docomo is developing a smart phone battery that can fully recharge in just 10 minutes. The major Japanese carrier (it has some 58 million Japanese customers) was showing off the device recently at CEATEC, an electronics exhibition in Japan, where a few reporters spotted it.


Details on the device, which is still in prototype, were scarce, but we have enough to get the general picture. Currently the battery takes the form of an external sleeve--not altogether unlike a Mophie "juice pack"--and only works for the time being with an Android phone, NEC's Medias (which, while currently Japanese-specific, is supposedly coming to the US, someday).


How does NTT Docomo recharge the battery so quickly? Simply by cramming in more energy, faster. While a standard battery pulls something like 0.55 amps, NTT Docomo's device pulls something like 5.85.

Everyone wants a faster-charging battery, of course, but NTT Docomo's presentation raised as many questions as it answered. How does it cram so much energy into a battery so quickly without the battery growing terribly hot? And would the high-speed charging imply a shorter overall battery lifespan? (I've sent requests for comment to NTT Docomo, which hasn't yet responded.) And don't even ask for details on pricing, let alone release date--"as soon as possible," was the only info NTT Docomo would give Engadget.


The question NTT Docomo seeks to answer--how do we get a faster-charging battery?--is more frequently asked of electric vehicles than of smart phones, since many analysts are convinced that EVs can only make inroads in markets once recharge times are comparable to refueling times. Quickening EV battery charges seems more crucial to me than speeding up smart phone charges--personally, my more typical problem is being caught without any outlet nearby at all when my iPhone's battery kicks it. Once I do find an outlet, I'm rarely bothered by the charging time--if there's an urgent smart-phone-necessitating matter at hand, I can typically achieve it while plugged in. Still, for folks who only have a short amount of time to dock before having to dash to the next location, such a battery would undoubtedly be a blessing.


While waiting for NTT Docomo to come to rescue, if you're desperate for extended battery life--and like to disguise your gadgets as breath mints--try out one of my favorite accessories, Adafruit Industries' "Minty Boost." Twenty bucks buys you a battery pack that poses as an Altoids can; plug it in via USB to help your phone go the extra mile.



back to table of contents
About Integrity Research Institute
Future Energy eNews
 is provided as a public service from Integrity Research Institute, a Non-Profit dedicated to educating the public on eco-friendly emerging energy technologies.
FREE copy of the 30 minute DVD "Progress in Future Energy" is available by sending an email with "Free DVD" in subject and mailing address in body.  

Your generous support is welcome by making a tax deductible donation on our secure websitemember
Save 10%
On all purchases from IRI by becoming a member and a free gift when you join and you save 10% on all conference and workshop fees as well.   You will receive a quarterly mailing with the latest information on eco-friendly emerging energy technologies. All 2011 IRI members will receive free copies of Energy magazines and the latest emerging energy technologies reports.
This email was sent to by |  
Integrity Research Institute | 5020 Sunnyside Ave | Suite 209 | Beltsville | MD | 20705