|
|
| Page 2 of 2 |
|
|
 Posted: Sun, 19th Oct 2008 22:15 Post subject: |
|
 |
| AnimalMother wrote: | This isn't a cure for cancer, it's a treatment. There's a massive difference, and while it will greatly decrease morbidity it won't eliminate it.
Personally I think that myc proto-oncogene targeted deactivation of post-hayflick telomerase is a far more promising area of research with regards to a cure. It could actually be administered as a prophylactic vaccine effective against about 90% of cancers.
This nanoparticle treatment is highly expensive, and will probably require multiple treatments for a full remission in malignant cancers. |
I don't know about that. Chemical targeting of cancer cells has been highly unsuccessful till now. The difference with the gold nanorods is that it works on a physical not chemical level.
As for the cost, i believe it's going to be cheaper than traditional treatment in the long run.
And while i agree it's not a cure, it can make cancer a manageable disease. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 20th Oct 2008 00:27 Post subject: |
|
|
| Mortibus wrote: | more like wtf just happend  |
| Quote: | Telomerase is an enzyme that allows a cell’s DNA to maintain its length after division. Without telomerase, cells can only divide a certain amount of times before their DNA is shortened leading to cellular death. This limit of division in normal cells is known as the hayflick limit. A detailed definition of the hayflick limit can be found here.
Telomerase is not active in normal dividing somatic cells, but has been shown to be overexpressed in cancer cells, allowing them to divide indefinitely. The firm Pharmex has developed a vaccine called GV1001, a peptide vaccine that is engineered to illicit a response to the enzyme telomerase. In theory this vaccine could be used as a universal vaccine, since cancerous cells need Telomerase to survive. It is currently being developed in numerous cancer populations. |
http://cancerfocus.net/taxonomy/term/426 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 20th Oct 2008 01:13 Post subject: |
|
|
| AnimalMother wrote: | | It could actually be administered as a prophylactic vaccine effective against about 90% of cancers. |
Lubbers ?!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 20th Oct 2008 02:11 Post subject: |
|
|
| compubrain3000 wrote: | | AnimalMother wrote: | This isn't a cure for cancer, it's a treatment. There's a massive difference, and while it will greatly decrease morbidity it won't eliminate it.
Personally I think that myc proto-oncogene targeted deactivation of post-hayflick telomerase is a far more promising area of research with regards to a cure. It could actually be administered as a prophylactic vaccine effective against about 90% of cancers.
This nanoparticle treatment is highly expensive, and will probably require multiple treatments for a full remission in malignant cancers. |
I don't know about that. Chemical targeting of cancer cells has been highly unsuccessful till now. The difference with the gold nanorods is that it works on a physical not chemical level.
As for the cost, i believe it's going to be cheaper than traditional treatment in the long run.
And while i agree it's not a cure, it can make cancer a manageable disease. |
Thats true, but I was thinking more of a gene therapy, rather then a peptide that denatures telomerase. The problem with that is that it needs it's activity regulated to prevent it from interfering with germ cell metaphase.
Whereas proto-oncogene therapy could be administrated at an early age and would be active for life. It's actually progressed far more then you might think. But is currently one of the less pursued area's of research due to ethical issues.
ZimZimma
"Techniclly speaking, Beta-Manboi didnt inject Burberry_Massi with Benz, he injected him with liquid that had air bubbles in it, which caused benz." - House M.D
"Faith without logic is the same as knowledge without understanding; meaningless"
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
helvete
Posts: 2727
Location: Sweden
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cohen
Posts: 7155
Location: Rapture
|
| Posted: Tue, 21st Oct 2008 13:02 Post subject: |
|
|
if will smith cured cancer Id shit myself inside out and infect myself with aids on purpose
troll detected by SiN
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spankie
VIP Member
Posts: 2958
Location: Belgium
|
| Posted: Fri, 24th Oct 2008 15:33 Post subject: |
|
|
| FireMaster wrote: | cure for cancer and aids is very possible but it's not good for business...
gotta suck'em dry from their money before they die |
nah, thats not true
the ultimate aids drug is not good for business, because poor people have aids... 90% are poor africans, you cannot let them pay. So you make 'chronic' medication that they have to pay the rest of their life, but payable for them.
Cancer is another business. Cancer is a 'modern' 'western' diseases. So you make an ultimate medicine and just ask 100k for it  and they are doing that already. Those new treatments are unpayable for a normal being... But i work together with a guy who has a cancer research company and he says "Develop and let them pay or die" and then he goes further "Assholes from big companies make money because they are arrogant and cocky... Those people would sell a house to fix them and live a little longer"
Oh you gotta love pharma industry, it is all about making people better and curing diseases for the sake of being a good human being...
| compubrain3000 wrote: | | Mortibus wrote: | | more like wtf just happend |
| Quote: | Telomerase is an enzyme that allows a cell’s DNA to maintain its length after division. Without telomerase, cells can only divide a certain amount of times before their DNA is shortened leading to cellular death. This limit of division in normal cells is known as the hayflick limit. A detailed definition of the hayflick limit can be found here.
Telomerase is not active in normal dividing somatic cells, but has been shown to be overexpressed in cancer cells, allowing them to divide indefinitely. The firm Pharmex has developed a vaccine called GV1001, a peptide vaccine that is engineered to illicit a response to the enzyme telomerase. In theory this vaccine could be used as a universal vaccine, since cancerous cells need Telomerase to survive. It is currently being developed in numerous cancer populations. |
http://cancerfocus.net/taxonomy/term/426 |
im sorry to disappoint you... but i guy sitting 1 m away from me atm finished his PhD last week on "telomers and cancer" and telomerase to fix cancer is crap. I went to his public defense and from what i understand, you have to choose between sudden cardiac arrest or cancer. Telomerase is associated with CVD(cardiovascular diseases). Reducing cancer by upregulating telomerase killed the mouses veeeeeeeeery fast. No telomerase=no high bloodpressure, good heart, but dead before puberty because of tumours.
btw i dont expect any breakthrough in the very near future, not for cancer, not for aids or diabetes or whatever diseaes. Creditcrunch is hitting the biotech sector very very very hard. they burn money the first 10/20 years before commercialising a pharma product. Venture capital is scarce and going into other projects with a guaranteed (lower) return... and no money=no research
Sad to say, but it is the way it is...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 24th Oct 2008 18:12 Post subject: |
|
|
Interesting, cynical and completely unsurprising shit
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SycoShaman
VIP Master Jedi
Posts: 24468
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Sat, 25th Oct 2008 07:56 Post subject: |
|
|
| kaeye wrote: | | if will smith cured cancer Id shit myself inside out and infect myself with aids on purpose |
if your refering to I am Legend...he doesnt cure cancer. He cures the disease that the virus that "cured" cancer which made ppl mutate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun, 26th Oct 2008 00:37 Post subject: |
|
|
The trick with cancer is curing it after a certain stage (by the time it's noticeable without tests). Treatment can easily eliminate it if it's detected early enough, but people don't usually have the habit of going through tests at least once a year unless they need it for X reason. If they did, there'd be a lot less cancer-related deaths.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 27th Oct 2008 09:10 Post subject: |
|
|
Gold or not gold, it's been so far absolutely impossible to "mark" cancer cells for automatic deletion. Scientist have been working on this forever and a half now. You need some kind of intelligence to select the cells.
May solve a special case, but not the general problem. The nanobots can potentially solve the more general problem by actively examining and destroying cancerous cells. But we are very very far from that. The solution presented uses an ionizing laser, which means that the cancer has to be visibly open, which also limits uses.
I do agree that cancer is an engineering problem, rather than a strictly medical one, but there needs to be some realism.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 27th Oct 2008 14:30 Post subject: |
|
|
| PoorLeno wrote: | Gold or not gold, it's been so far absolutely impossible to "mark" cancer cells for automatic deletion. Scientist have been working on this forever and a half now. You need some kind of intelligence to select the cells.
May solve a special case, but not the general problem. The nanobots can potentially solve the more general problem by actively examining and destroying cancerous cells. But we are very very far from that. The solution presented uses an ionizing laser, which means that the cancer has to be visibly open, which also limits uses.
I do agree that cancer is an engineering problem, rather than a strictly medical one, but there needs to be some realism. |
He already succeeded in marking the cancer cells in humans using gold nanorod bound antibodies. It's currently being used for cancer screening.
All that's left is to destroy the cancer cells using the unique physical properties of the nano gold particles.
This cures cancer in 100% of animal subjects. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 27th Oct 2008 14:36 Post subject: |
|
|
| spankie wrote: | | im sorry to disappoint you... but i guy sitting 1 m away from me atm finished his PhD last week on "telomers and cancer" and telomerase to fix cancer is crap. I went to his public defense and from what i understand, you have to choose between sudden cardiac arrest or cancer. Telomerase is associated with CVD(cardiovascular diseases). Reducing cancer by upregulating telomerase killed the mouses veeeeeeeeery fast. No telomerase=no high bloodpressure, good heart, but dead before puberty because of tumours. |
The idea is to actually downregulate telomerase not upregulate it  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SycoShaman
VIP Master Jedi
Posts: 24468
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Mon, 27th Oct 2008 17:55 Post subject: |
|
|
You know what I dont get and maybe comp or someone with medical knowledge can explain it to me.
They mapped the human genome a few years ago so they know what cells do what in the body.
Wouldn't that mean they'd be able to pin point the cause of cancer and or eliminate it? considering they know how everything works?
Cause I remember watching the news when they announced they mapped the human genome and I thought it would put an end to diseases we couldnt cure...
I know Im probably way off, but like i said, maybe comp or someone can explain it to me why they cant cure it considering they know what everything does and how stuff interacts and such.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 27th Oct 2008 18:32 Post subject: |
|
|
| SycoShaman wrote: | | I know Im probably way off, but like i said, maybe comp or someone can explain it to me why they cant cure it considering they know what everything does and how stuff interacts and such. |
Well, the simple answer is "they don't know".
The fact is, we still don't know how or why a lot of stuff in our bodies work.
The thing with cancer in particular is that there are so many types with so many different causes that makes finding one cure almost impossible.
There is more to cancer than just genetics. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SycoShaman
VIP Master Jedi
Posts: 24468
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Mon, 27th Oct 2008 18:36 Post subject: |
|
|
| compubrain3000 wrote: | | SycoShaman wrote: | | I know Im probably way off, but like i said, maybe comp or someone can explain it to me why they cant cure it considering they know what everything does and how stuff interacts and such. |
Well, the simple answer is "they don't know".
The fact is, we still don't know how or why a lot of stuff in our bodies work.
The thing with cancer in particular is that there are so many types with so many different causes that makes finding one cure almost impossible.
There is more to cancer than just genetics. |
Oh ok |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 29th Oct 2008 09:22 Post subject: |
|
|
Yesterday I talked to CEO of C-RAD (Medical Imaging company in Sweden), and he told me that this is bull. In fact, I tried to sound a little learned - "did you know, blahblahb, gold, ionizing lazerz, etc", and he apparently knew all about it, and told me how it works and that it's certainly not going to make any difference at all. Those types of cancers that are apparently curable with this technology have been curable(definition: patient survives the procedure and goes on living for five more years) to a high degree even before.
He explained that a lot of people are working on the problem, but there's no "one magic cure" in sight. Radiation techniques have been around for a while, and the problem has been balancing out radiation doses to the healthy tissue around the cancerous growth and detecting the day to day movement of the cancerous tissue (since treatments last as long as six months, some tissue like the prostate gland and breast cysts move around a lot). Gold has been apparently used for the latter. By the way, he said that the gold is left in the tissue after the procedure; I somehow imagined it washing out...
And apparently all bets are off when the cancer undergoes metastasis. People thought that chemo therapy would have cured cancer, but we aren't there yet. Next best bet, as I already pointed out, is into the future where nanotechnology has some potential to help - however the C-RAD guy dismissed it as science fiction - when I pressed him on the subject, he said "Everything is possible, I guess".
EDIT: Ah, he also scared me with some statistics - 1/3 people (in the western world) get cancer in their lifetime (sweden - 40%), and my generation (I'm 22) will have 1/2 odds, he wagered.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spankie
VIP Member
Posts: 2958
Location: Belgium
|
| Posted: Thu, 30th Oct 2008 14:44 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 30th Oct 2008 17:40 Post subject: |
|
|
| PoorLeno wrote: | Yesterday I talked to CEO of C-RAD (Medical Imaging company in Sweden), and he told me that this is bull. In fact, I tried to sound a little learned - "did you know, blahblahb, gold, ionizing lazerz, etc", and he apparently knew all about it, and told me how it works and that it's certainly not going to make any difference at all. Those types of cancers that are apparently curable with this technology have been curable(definition: patient survives the procedure and goes on living for five more years) to a high degree even before.
He explained that a lot of people are working on the problem, but there's no "one magic cure" in sight. Radiation techniques have been around for a while, and the problem has been balancing out radiation doses to the healthy tissue around the cancerous growth and detecting the day to day movement of the cancerous tissue (since treatments last as long as six months, some tissue like the prostate gland and breast cysts move around a lot). Gold has been apparently used for the latter. By the way, he said that the gold is left in the tissue after the procedure; I somehow imagined it washing out...
And apparently all bets are off when the cancer undergoes metastasis. People thought that chemo therapy would have cured cancer, but we aren't there yet. Next best bet, as I already pointed out, is into the future where nanotechnology has some potential to help - however the C-RAD guy dismissed it as science fiction - when I pressed him on the subject, he said "Everything is possible, I guess".
EDIT: Ah, he also scared me with some statistics - 1/3 people (in the western world) get cancer in their lifetime (sweden - 40%), and my generation (I'm 22) will have 1/2 odds, he wagered. |
I don't mean to be disrespectful, but i think that a world leading scientist has a lot more credibility than the "C-RAD guy"
| Quote: | | For his work in the area of applying laser spectroscopic techniques to study of properties and behavior on the nanoscale, El-Sayed was elected to the National Academy of Sciences in 1980, and in 2002, he won the Irving Langmuir Award in Chemical Physics. He has been the recipient of the 1990 King Faisal International Prize ("Arabian Nobel Prize") in Sciences, Georgia Tech's highest award, "The Class of 1943 Distinguished Professor", an honorary doctorate of philosophy from the Hebrew University, and several other awards including some from the different ACS local sections. He was a Sherman Fairchild Distinguished Scholar at the California Institute of Technology and an Alexander von Humboldt Senior U.S. Scientist Awardee. He served as editor-in-chief of the Journal of Physical Chemistry from 1980-2004 and has also served as the U.S. editor of the International Reviews in Physical Chemistry. He is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, a member of the American Physical Society, the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the Third World Academy of Science. Mostafa El-Sayed was awarded the 2007 US National Medal of Science "for his seminal and creative contributions to our understanding of the electronic and optical properties of nano-materials and to their applications in nano-catalysis and nano-medicine, for his humanitarian efforts of exchange among countries and for his role in developing the scientific leadership of tomorrow.Dr. Mostafa was also announced to be the recipient of the 2009 Ahmed Zewail prize in molecular sciences." |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mostafa_El-Sayed#Honors |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nouseforaname
Über-VIP Member
Posts: 21306
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 31st Oct 2008 10:53 Post subject: |
|
|
You didn't have to bring up all the evidence - you should just say "my guy has a wiki page", and "yours doesn't", to win that argument, compubrain.
I agree, of course, but I enjoy a good philosophical argument, perhaps without all the facts; which neither of us can fathom anyway. Instead we need to go by the indicators. My guy would win/lose money if he was right/wrong, and since he's very successful one could argue that he'd optimize very well, once the information was available to him.
No major media outlet is a-buzz with saving 20 million human lives annually, and that's another indicator that something isn't quite right. Maybe it's the reverse of "shouting fire in a crowded place"-effect and also people in the scientific community are very reserved dealing with Panacea solutions to age-old problems.
We'll see, but if I was a betting man, I would say that this will not make any significant impact (ie statistically, of course, saving even one life can be considered significant, especially if that person the goes on to finding the real solution... but let's not get ahead of ourselves).
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 2 of 2 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
|
 |
|
