What is Digg?47 Comments
- yeastbeast, on 10/12/2007, -1/+24I'm a molecular biologist. This story just ain't news, folks... studies of this type are published weekly in countless obscure academic journals. This is no way a major breakthrough, and the link describing it has the breathless air of PR about it. It's curious how utterly trivial things sometimes end up getting dugg.
- Chompy, on 10/12/2007, -8/+29I remember back when these kinds of discoveries were made in the United States.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+24if King George gets his way, we wont have to worry about such trivialities as scientific advancement ever again. i mean, why waste money on science when armegeddon is perpetually just around the corner.
- ryogahibiki, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15Unfortunately, ever since Dr. Hwang Woo Suk faked his "breakthrough" cloning experiment, all Korean scientific breakthroughs will now be met with skepticism.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13"Indeed. For example, the education system has failed to teach you how to use the apostrophe. 70s, not 70's."
The society has failed to teach you proper intelligent discussion.
Instead of a coherent informed response, you nitpick someone's grammar, contributing nothing to the discussion.
Typical. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9Just like the cloning incident?
- CiXeL, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5always another "BREAKTHROUGH" and never a cure.
cures don't exist anymore, they're unprofitable. - freebird4, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"A Wnt-Axin2-GSK3 Cascade Regulates Snail1 Activity in Breast Cancer Cells."
What a marvellous breakthrough. - quixand, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Yeah....everyone in the US is becoming "stupider" all the time indeed. And you're all part of the problem. The correct comment would have been: The US is becoming "more stupid". Stupider is NOT a word.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"The US is getting stupider by the generation."
Indeed. People wonder why there are so many more "foreign" doctors and scientists. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Just hurry up and cure my damn cancer!
- djjuice, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I hope this is true, last time they stated something like this and the guy ended up saying he lied.
- pevail, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Around 1970,in France Antoine Priore built and tested electromagnetic healing machines of startling effectiveness.
In hundred of rigorous tests with laboratory animals,Priore demonstrated a nearly 100%
cure of all kind of terminal cancers and leukemias.
Many of the tests were done by prestigious members of the French Academy of Sciences.
The entire Western World knew nothing of phase conjugation when Priore was getting his finest results.
Only the Soviets knew of time-reversed waves.
You decide why we still have no working machines when they could be easily
manufactured over thirty years ago. - AeonTorpor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Or fortunately. Skepticism is what science is about and that's a good thing.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Koreans come up with ground breaking developments on CANCER which kills HUMAN BEINGS, and all you guys can talk about is why the US didn't come up with it first? Holy *****!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I bet you also believe that some flying animal is draining your sheep of blood at night.
- Chompy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Actually, "70's" is gramatically correct. Any number or acronym should have an apostrophe separating the -s modifier in the plural form.
So, it's:
"There are many NGO's operating internationally."
"The 9's have it.""
Actually no, you are incorrect. Take a look in any English textbook. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Someone really needs to invent something better than money.
- ABadInAlbany, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5curious? not really. when you have a bunch of teens, college students and unemployed 20somethings running around with their heads in the sand, or in other dark places, what's normal to the outside world is news-making here.
- unitethenations, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1What on earth does political affiliation have to do with the ability to read? Did I miss something?
- hakz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Wow another breakthrough (sarcasm). Are they actually any step closer to finding a cure? I mean how many breakthroughs have scientists had?
- megaloid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You have a chupacabra problem, too?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Funny how this material is already in textbooks. If you bought into the hype surrounding this article, you'd think that the authors were just predicting the future...
- whiffen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Peer reviewed means nothing unless the result can be replicated by other labs. With so many daily "breakthroughs" in cancer research in the popular press.... I thought cancer would have been cured by now.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Maybe he's saying that UMich is a bunch of snotty libs. I mean, Ann Arbor is a pretty liberal place.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1What's your science background? Sorry for the ad hominem, but the only people who seriously believe what you've said are people who don't understand the molecular genetic / biochemical bases of cancer.
- StayPuft, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Better double check the data.
- tekz0r, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Would anyone think it's safe to assume that clinicians and drug companies overseas (NOT in the U.S.) are not as monetarily influenced as our pharmaceutical companies here in the states? I've been a long believer that there ARE cures for numerous diseases, drug companies just buy up patents/payoff researchers to keep selling their own cocktails at exorbitant prices. If I were to really stretch I'd say they're the ones "inciting fear" among the nation, following the Phillip Morris business model: issue the highly addictive substance, then issue the substance quitting assistance substance, and charge unbelievably high prices for both (Cigarettes for $6 a pack, wtf? Nicorette for $60? I'd rather buy a carton and put it in an electrified cage that only dispensed a cigarette twice a day.)
Whether this IS a legitimate breakthrough or not, I think it's a good way to get a fire going under pharm's asses in the U.S., since researchers have all kinds funding and all the means and technology and still come up with utter ***** in terms of useful, helpful techniques/drugs to rid us of diseases we (as technologically advanced as our world has become) should already be past.
Yes, I said it. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -11/+11The US is getting stupider by the generation.
Compare high school classes back in the 70's to what they are today. Back then, by the time you graduated, you were taking college-entry level classes. Now, your first year in college is more or less re-hashing what you already learned in high school.
Test scores are getting lowered each year so more students appear to pass so districts get more funding.
It's starting to show. The US is not only becoming stupider as a collective (look at our President, our "representative"), but we're behind in technology and science. Laws are being passed to aid corporations (who donate and lobby for these laws so they can maintain a stranglehold on the market, read: net neutrality) and progress is stagnant.
It's no surprise though, this sort of thing was predicted years ago if both the education and political systems weren't changed (in terms of them actually raising the bar for students being able to graduate or limit on laws helping big business even further). - monkeywizard, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0They'll trade the secret to you for lotsa funding!
- jrain157, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@ floatingpoints:
"The US is getting stupider by the generation."
Stupider is not a word, try "more stupid"
"language of thought (LOT) hypothesis states that cognition is a process of computation over compositional mental representations. This means that thoughts are represented in a "language" (sometimes known as mentalese) which allows complex thoughts to be built up by combining simpler thoughts in various ways. It is clear from the biology of the brain that these mental representations are not present in the same way as symbols written on paper; rather, the LOT is supposed to exist at the cognitive level, the level of thoughts and concepts."
I'm trying to tell you not to cast the first stone when you're talking about intelligence. - bayblabber, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I'm gona have to agree with the parent, my lab does work in this area and this paper while interesting is far from a breakthrough. Maybe Korea is trying to buy back some scientific credibility after the cloning debacle. Nothing to see here, move along.
- btgoss, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3As a cancer patient, currently in remission, I am glad there are discoveries everyday.
The fact that it is a Korean breakthrough is comforting... not like them to lie about research or anything (painting with a broad brush, since the academic situation in Korea seems to foster lying in order to keep funding... as evidenced by the cloning problems in the past.) - Balf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Amazing to see such arrogance and hope.
This is a significant scientific advancement since less than 2 % of patients who's cancer spreads survive 5 years (in North America).
Asians are light years ahead of us on cancer treatments, knowledge and science. Just go see the truth at the World Health Organization Cancer report for 2002.
The cynics need to step back from the one Korean scientist that did make a mistake and wonder why that single event played on the airways, intensively for months.
When you are behind, you can accept a loss, or trip your opponent.
Wake up. We are the ones suffering and dying from cancer the most. Who do you really believe?
WHO number don't lie. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Yes please invent something better than money. Maybe then ill be rich lol.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2cant they just use a word like "spread" instead of making me feel stupid.
- blahblah, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Actually, "70's" is gramatically correct. Any number or acronym should have an apostrophe separating the -s modifier in the plural form.
So, it's:
"There are many NGO's operating internationally."
"The 9's have it." - Cardiakke, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Yeah! the good old days when those damn foreigners knew their place, starving in the cold down on the farm! Things were much better back then.
I mean, who do they think they are? Inventing things, creating companies, etc....
Is that what you mean?
And as to "The US is getting stupider by the generation", Digg is the proof - gardnert1, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4maybe if christians didn't run the country science would have a chance.
- Chompy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1"Big whoop. One spot. Are you that much of a grammar Nazi?"
When the topic is someone bemoaning the state of our education system, yest. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -11/+8you mean in Europe.
- oldwarrior, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Uh, if you read the fine article, you will see that the Univ of Michigan participated. Typical misinformed, snotty, libs.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3Big whoop. One spot. Are you that much of a grammar Nazi?
- Chompy, on 10/12/2007, -11/+7"It's starting to show. The US is not only becoming stupider as a collective (look at our President, our "representative"), but we're behind in technology and science. It's no surprise though, this sort of thing was predicted years ago if the education system wasn't changed (in terms of them actually raising the bar for students being able to graduate)."
Indeed. For example, the education system has failed to teach you how to use the apostrophe. 70s, not 70's. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -14/+10I worry every time I read news about a non-Western country coming up with some kind of a medical breakthrough. I'm not trying to say that Western medical researchers are somehow superior, but if history is any indication, non-Western medical research announcements tend to be shrouded in hyperbole, involve fabricated evidence, or the study was conducted with questionable ethics and practices.
I'm hoping this really is a breakthrough, though. After all, South Korea is a pretty modernized country. But let's wait until international scientists have a chance to weigh in on the matter. My prediction? The conclusions of this research are bound to be over-exaggerated. - bbrosemer, on 10/12/2007, -34/+6I'm so ronery, so roney and sadrey arone.
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is