Zhittya’s Parkinsons’ Trial
On a recent weekend, a mentor assigned me some homework. Could I recreate the Zhittya clinical trials for Parkinsons and Cognitive Decline?
Learn more about the trial here:
https://youtu.be/UqfHIdCNwew?si=fAfKTYTLNQNtRyV-
The trials have advanced successfully to phase 3. When assigned something like this the first thing I want to know is the mechanism.
The mechanism is FGF-1 promotion. FGF-1 or fibroblast growth factor, is a growth factor and signaling protein encoded by the FGF1 gene. It is synthesized as a 155 amino acid polypeptide. FGF-1 plays an overarching role in development, angiogenesis (growth of blood vessels) and wound healing processes. FGF-1 is part of a family of FGF proteins.
In the case of the Zhittya trial the success of the trial is assigned to FGF-1 stimulating growth of new blood vessels in the brain; subsequently allowing for improved nervous system function.
Could I get my hands on FGF-1? Probably.
But, what do we have access to at this very moment in time that I can verify as safe/low risk.
Peptides come to mind.
With substances like FGF-1 or Peptides we want to make sure that what we are getting is high quality pure and tested. I always check the certificates of analysis for items I use.
There are other peptides that overlap in function.
TB4 Peptide:
The increase of blood vessel/epicardial substance (Bves) expressing cells accompanied by elevated VEGF, Flk-1, TGF-beta, Fgfr-2, Fgfr-4, Fgf-17 and beta-Catenin expression and increase of Tbx-18 and Wt-1 positive myocardial progenitors suggested organ-wide recall of the embryonic program in the adult epicardium
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19358334/
Relevance of BPC157:
Increases FGF-2, modulates dopamine system
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27847966/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21030672/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8719292/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9403784/
We know that these peptides have a good safety profile and have been used intra-nasally.
FBF-1 vs. FGF-2:
FGF-1 has 50% homology with FGF-2, and although it is 10 times less potent as an angiogenic stimulant, it can provoke endothelial cell proliferation and motility and contribute to wound angiogenesis.
HBOT does stimulate FGF-1 and the entirety of the FGF family.
https://www.phcogj.com/article/1817
We see from Zhittya’s protocol that the FGF-1 is administered intranasally. Patients hold it in by tilting their head upside down in between their legs. It would be easy enough to create a nasal peptide product for clients to use after a Hyperbaric session.
The big question for me is whether the benefits stick. Often when I see treatments like this that address the injured area, but not the driver of injury, benefit typically will fade. If the client chooses to continue the medical intervention without addressing inflammation will they have continued access to the substance? Is it financially feasible? Does efficacy improve if the intervention is combined with addressing underlying drivers of inflammation?
What do you guys think? Knowing that Zhittya is moving to Malaysia where cost of participation may be in the range of 25-50,000USD. Would you be inclined to receive their treatment?
If interested in working with peptides feel free to book a free clarity call or drop us an email!
