Page 11 of 16 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 156

Thread: Scientists cure cancer, but no one takes notice

  1. #101
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,626

    Re: Scientists cure cancer, but no one takes notice

    Quote Originally Posted by X Factor View Post
    Then I have a question for you, CC. When doctors find a cancerous tumor, why do they seek to remove the whole tumor (if possible) then often follow up with chemotherapy to try to eradicate any remaining cancer cells? If ongoing treatment has such a larger potential for profit, wouldn't it make more sense to leave a few cancer cells behind to assure the need for future treatment?
    Medical ethics. Pharmaceutical companies are under no obligation towards these kinds of ethics.


    But there is huge profit potential in all three.
    All three cannot exist at the same time. Tell me how much profit is there, currently, in the treatment of polio?

    Hummmmm, ok, good point.
    Good. You see what I'm getting at. The issue isn't profit. The issue is profit without looking at larger issues, also.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  2. #102
    Dungeon Master
    anti socialist

    X Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Texas Proud
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 04:24 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    44,721

    Re: Scientists cure cancer, but no one takes notice

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Medical ethics. Pharmaceutical companies are under no obligation towards these kinds of ethics.
    But it would be those medical professionals that would be prescribing and utilizing the drugs.


    All three cannot exist at the same time. Tell me how much profit is there, currently, in the treatment of polio?
    Is there even treatment available for polio once someone has it?



    Good. You see what I'm getting at. The issue isn't profit. The issue is profit without looking at larger issues, also.
    I don't oppose reasonable regulation, but I do oppose over-regulation as well as any notion the profit is inherently evil.
    The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.
    Mahatma Gandhi


  3. #103
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,952

    Re: Scientists cure cancer, but no one takes notice

    Quote Originally Posted by spud_meister View Post
    Interesting, though I'll point out it's from 2007, but here's the original study, so if anyone with a brain can tell us what it means. *cough*Digsbe*cough*
    I'll do my best to explain it

    Here is some background information that might help things clear up. Apoptosis is programmed cell death. Things that trigger apoptosis are events like DNA damage. Cancer is a disease of accumulated mutations that cause healthy genes to become abnormal. Oncogenes are genes, when mutated, may cause the cell to proliferate out of the norm. Tumor suppressor genes function just as their name suggests. These genes typically function in pathways that recognize DNA damage and attempt to fix it, others regulate apoptosis. P53 is the grand daddy of tumor suppressors and is mutated in the majority of cancers.

    Apoptosis has a complex molecular pathway within the cell so I'll condense it. Essentially, the cell recognizes DNA damage and tries to fix it, if it can't fix it the cell will attempt to kill itself via apoptosis. There is a protein called cytochrome C that is within the mitochondrial membrane. Certain proteins like BCL-2 will latch onto the mitochondrial membrane and weaken it. When it's weakened cytochrome C may leak out of the mitochondria and into the cytoplasm. From here, cytochrome C then acts upon another molecular pathway (the apoptotic caspase cascade) which ultimately ends with the cell committing cellular seppuku (apoptosis).

    What these researchers are saying is that cancer cells use aerobic glycolysis in the cytoplasm as their form of metabolism. Most normal cells will preform oxidative glycolysis within the mitochondria. The researchers are saying that they can inhibit aerobic glycolysis in the cytoplasm by inhibiting a protein that is necessary for it to function. Pyruvate is a product of the glycosidic pathway, and pyruvate dehydrogenase kinase (PDK) is a protein involved in this (a kinase phosphorilates things. Based on the name I would imagine that it phosphorilates a dehydrogenase kinase that acts upon the pyruvate molecule. I would have to look it up though). If the aerobic glycolysis is inhibited, this would cause the cell to move its metabolism more so into the mitochondria like a normal cell would. They believe that in doing so, it would help prevent the apoptotic resistance by normalizing the mitochondria in this way.

    My personal interpretation of this is that more research must be done. Anyone that claims to have a universal cure for cancer is a scientific charlatan. Each cancer is unique with it's own genes and mutations. No to skin cancers will be identical just as no to cancers of any system will be identical. One thing cancer cells must accomplish is become resistant to apoptosis. However, this doesn't always have to be via a stabilizing of the mitochondrial membrane that prevents cytochrome C from leaking out. These cells may have mutations in BCL-2 or P53 which could also inhibit apoptosis in a different way. Sure, this drug may have some promise in cancers that have apoptotic resistance, but I don't think it would have much of an impact. Once a cell divides it believes it's new DNA is perfect, thus it believes that the mutations it has are perfect because it doesn't know any better. If anything this drug would be a helpful co-therapy with chemotherapy if the cells have apoptotic resistance because their mitochondrial membranes are too stable to allow cytochrome C to leak out. I think much more research must be done, and I do not believe that this is a cure for cancer.
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

  4. #104
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Everywhere and Nowhere
    Last Seen
    03-07-12 @ 03:28 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,692

    Re: Scientists cure cancer, but no one takes notice

    We all seem to agree that the pharmaceutical industry is profit motivated and thus cannot be relied on to provide us with actual cures. So WHY are people using its products then? Are there no alternatives?

    Furthermore, why doesn't there exist non for profit organizations that receive private and public funding in order to create actual cures? The university in the OP for example, with enough funding they could produce drugs.

    The pharmaceutical industry isn't just a benign profit seeker. It actively seeks out and destroys any other agency trying to cure diseases that it has a profitable monopoly on. It simply has so much money that it could lobby government to do practically anything against rivalries.

    How does the cycle get broken so that people don't have to suffer from terrible disease anymore?

  5. #105
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,952

    Re: Scientists cure cancer, but no one takes notice

    Quote Originally Posted by Temporal View Post
    We all seem to agree that the pharmaceutical industry is profit motivated and thus cannot be relied on to provide us with actual cures. So WHY are people using its products then? Are there no alternatives?

    Furthermore, why doesn't there exist non for profit organizations that receive private and public funding in order to create actual cures? The university in the OP for example, with enough funding they could produce drugs.

    The pharmaceutical industry isn't just a benign profit seeker. It actively seeks out and destroys any other agency trying to cure diseases that it has a profitable monopoly on. It simply has so much money that it could lobby government to do practically anything against rivalries.

    How does the cycle get broken so that people don't have to suffer from terrible disease anymore?
    I won't deny that the pharmaceutical industry is driven by profits, but all industries are. There are multiple pharmaceutical companies, and if one of them patented a miracle drug they could sell it fairly expensively and hurt their competition by removing the need for patients to buy chemotherapeutic drugs for cancer treatment. I don't think that profit would prevent them from creating this drug.

    The physicians also profit from cancer. There have been physicians who get kick backs from pharmaceutical companies for prescribing their chemo drugs. As far as cures go, the government does fund cancer research through the NIH. The government also provides us with a wonderful utility called the NCBI which allows free access to an enormous amount of information. They also have thousands of free published papers for scientists to read.

    I don't believe that the pharmaceutical drug companies are trying to prevent cures. I believe they are in a race to find effective drugs and to market them so that they can profit. Billions of dollars is spent by pharmaceutical companies on drug research to create new drugs.

    I believe the way to break the cycle is to change how we administer cancer therapy, and I see these changes being made slowly. We need to move away from the mindset that the physician is the know all-cure all and allow people in other branches of science to work with physicians to treat cancer. I don't want to demonize physicians in any way because their job is necessary, but we need a more incorporated healthcare model that allows people in other areas of science to aid in the treatment of cancer.
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

  6. #106
    Stigmatized! End R Word! Kali's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Last Seen
    08-19-12 @ 12:29 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    13,334
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Scientists cure cancer, but no one takes notice

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Not in the least. You keep developing "new" treatment drugs, that keep costing more and more. It keeps the train rolling. Once you have a cure, that's it. Nothing new. Initially, there would be lots of money to be made, but eventually, that dries up.

    And the kind of capitalism you are presenting has one purpose: profit at any cost, regardless of the impact.
    It would major money for 20 years til the patent ran out.. What would suck is all the people that would keep dying of cancer because they would be too poor to afford the med. to cure them. Brand name or generic something that would cure cancer would probably cost too much that only those with money and/or decent health bennies would benefit from it.
    ~Following My Own Flow~

  7. #107
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    08-06-11 @ 01:55 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    1,006

    Re: Scientists cure cancer, but no one takes notice

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Shall we get into semantics about what "cure" means? If it cures cancer, that means once implimented, the individual no longer has cancer.
    but cancer is a by product of cell division and replication. So as long as such processes are occurring you'll have cancer.

  8. #108
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    08-06-11 @ 01:55 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    1,006

    Re: Scientists cure cancer, but no one takes notice

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Hmmm... so, since the medical business profits, monetarily from the individual being sick and needing treatment, which would the medical business profit from more... a complete cure, or continuing treatment?
    this seems to presuppose that everyone is going to act in a nice orderly and rational fashion, and that all possible actors see themselves as profiting from this scenario.

    Such circumstances are highly unlikely

  9. #109
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,952

    Re: Scientists cure cancer, but no one takes notice

    Quote Originally Posted by ManofthPeephole View Post
    but cancer is a by product of cell division and replication. So as long as such processes are occurring you'll have cancer.
    Not really. Cancer is the result of mutations in DNA which lead to abnormal cell proliferation. If you can kill all of the cancer cells then that person will be cured of that cancer. It's not a byproduct of cell division, it's the product of mutations. Although, mass cell proliferation can increase your risk of cancer because it gives more mutations a "pass" on to the next generation of cells.
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

  10. #110
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    08-06-11 @ 01:55 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    1,006

    Re: Scientists cure cancer, but no one takes notice

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    Not really. Cancer is the result of mutations in DNA which lead to abnormal cell proliferation. If you can kill all of the cancer cells then that person will be cured of that cancer. It's not a byproduct of cell division, it's the product of mutations. Although, mass cell proliferation can increase your risk of cancer because it gives more mutations a "pass" on to the next generation of cells.
    I didn't mean it as in "that once someone has cancer they can't be cured", but that as long our cells continue to divide people will develop cancer

    PS and isn't mutation a byproduct of cell division?

Page 11 of 16 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •