What is Digg?65 Comments
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+33so if I stuck 90% of my boot up your ass would you use the same argument?
- borninda818, on 10/12/2007, -9/+42Even if this becomes common in Europe and Asia, It will take years until it reaches America. Cancer is too profitable to drug companies. A magic injection that eliminates 90% of your cancer will not be embraced with open arms.
- DucoNihilum, on 10/12/2007, -2/+21Amazing.... I hope this is... real.
- gumby05, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19I just hope they get it out of testing before North Korea tries something crazy.
- chicken101, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19Still though, drug companies will make a ton of money selling this "cure". And they will make a ton of money selling things to help diagnose cancer. All may not be lost here.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17no but with stem cells we might be able to get you a new set pretty soon.
- gamer31, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14Well somebody is negative.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+17Uhm... It kills cancer cells dude. I don't think people ANYWHERE will have to wait long if this proves to be highly effective.
- grubesteak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Old, old news. But still great, nonetheless.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/HEALTH/06/22/cancer.virus/index.html - NinjAlt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Ok, cancer is almost gone, AIDS is almost gone, Now get to work on unlocking the X-Gene so I can get some adamantium claws.
- sancho320, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9True. but a little cancer is better than a lot of cancer, and other methods can be used to wipe out the remainder.
- raisinbran, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Yeah, this is great news, but does anyone know of a more reputable source carrying the same story?
- SciGuy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8The problem with eliminating 90% of the cells is that the remaining 10% will continue to grow and likely won't be affected by the virus. That means that you simply stall the inevitable. This has been the problem with cancer biology for the last 40 years. Many different types of chemo and irradiation can be very effective, even greater than 90% effective at killing off cancer cells. But the last 10% still grow and end up "growing through" the treatment. This is the same problem that we see with drug resistant bacteria. You can kill 99.999% of the bacteria, but the one cell that is resistant will continue to divide.
Don't get too excited about these types of mediocre reports. There is a reason this isn't in Science or Nature - more reputable journals.
We're making progress in cancer biology but this ain't it. - authors, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I am encouraged no matter what about developments such as these. I am a cancer survivor (going on 12 years now) and know how hard such a thing is on someone. More power to them.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Exactly. It'll be common in Europe and Asia, and of course Canada. So you hop a plane to another country, get your treament there, have yourself a nice vacation while your at it, and do it all for a fraction of the cost of what chemo/radiation would cost here in the States.
Come on: stoners already go to Amsterdam for the weed; and there's plentyof seniors that go to Canada to buy their meds in bulk every few months. Hell, I've even seen bulletins for it around here in New York. - captinherb, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6@sancho320
He is talking about Korea. North with the nukes. Dumbass. - Takteek, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5No.
- SolidXtreme, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5will this cure my blackened heart and lungs
- bunni, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5It's based on the adenovirus (commonly known as 'the cold'), so... is this cure contagious? ...and if it mutates might we have a contageous virus that kills 90% of 'good' cells in 60 days?
- allthewhile, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Yes its profitible to drug companies, but don't you think a cure would be insanely profitible to the company that develops it? The drug companies don't have an evil cabal where they make decisions in lockstep. They're competing against each other. Keeping someone alive from cancer means we can give them more meds.
The other companies may not want it to come out, but they won't be able to stop the one that does. And pretty soon, the cool part is, they'll all be copying the technique driving down the price. - goldenman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+590% is close enough that it does make a BIG difference.
- CBTF, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8Stem cell research is amazing, unfortunately religious fanatics are against people living longer.
- Cl1mh4224rd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"Keep in mind that these scientists are from a country whose last top scientist fraudently claimed to develop stem cells from cloned human embryos."
How is this blatant and totally inappropriate generalization still in the positives? - fallenone05, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5If they could've cured 90% of my mother's cancer back in '94, I think she would've had good chances of surviving. I hope this story is true.
- heavensblade23, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Research fraud happens everywhere, not just in SK.
- milkmage, on 10/12/2007, -6/+10totally - having first hand experience (my father died from it) there's waaaay too much money to be made on therapies designed to prolong life.. not kill the disease.. the longer the patient lingers, the more money there is to be made. there's something to be said for socialized medicine.
- sjh7899, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4i agree, i work in cancer research and this is a huge deal..
- captinherb, on 10/12/2007, -11/+14Remember, the drug companies don't want a cure, they want to make it chronic.
- rogerbannister, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3FTA: "90 percent of cancer cells in the brains, liver, lungs and womb of mice disappeared within 60 days"
Note the "within 60 days" part. It may kill more than that with a longer time. - lorean, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4That would never happen. People would just go overseas to get the cure, and how much profit would the American drug companies be making then?
- ryannerd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I agree with you. Pharmaceutical companies will not be happy if an inexpensive cure for cancer becomes available (unless they are the pharmaceutical company selling the cure).
- sancho320, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Somebody get a doctor in here.
- hoyaman, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4considering the nature of cancer....
If there's 1%, it's still a malignant tumor, it's just been set back to 1% of the cells replicating like crazy. The medical bill, meanwhile, has ballooned by 50 - 80%, since chemotherapy would still be required.
So it's not negative, and it most certainly is not your boot, unless your boot is colon cancer. - rogerbannister, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Some viruses that will kill 100% of your cells in far less than 60 days include smallpox and ebola...
- arpad, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2If "stalling the inevitable" means someone I care about, like me, doesn't die for another year or two or ten then bring it on.
- Shodemofi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1A pity N. Korea may have nuked them by then....
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'd rather take a shot of vitamin C than a virus.
http://digg.com/health/Intravenous_Vitamin_C_Kills_Cancer_Cells - aston127, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3So one half of the country is developing (or has developed) technology to kill millions of people... while the other half may just have cured cancer (or close to), saving millions of lives.
maybe they cancel out?
quite a dramatic irony if you ask me - ProfChaosOmega, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This is excellent news
- davidod87, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Let's give you cancer and see if you can develop a more effective treatment.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1that would be scary. it'd probibly be airborne too.
- CaptainRadium, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1This is good news for mice.
However, a 90% kill isn't all that significant. Also, getting it to work effectively with acceptable toxicities in humans is a different story. - AtariEric, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Nah... you'll just get the melting jellyfish set of genes...
- timshead, on 10/12/2007, -6/+6Keep in mind that these scientists are from a country whose last top scientist fraudently claimed to develop stem cells from cloned human embryos.
While it would be nice if someone actually made a cancer-killing virus, let's not get our hopes up prematurely. As it stands there is a virus that kills cancer cells in mice. We don't know if it's going to work for humans or not. - rogerbannister, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I have heard it said that "if you have have cancer, then you really want to be a mouse, because the cures usually work only for them".
- ineser, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0that is really good news
- zekt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0If any of the scientests are reading this, can they please get some of the virus and transfer it to somewhere else (like Switzerland). You know, just in case the nutty neighbour in the north happens to lob over a few bombs. Work like this is too good to take the chance of loosing!
- Xenu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0But... but what would the truth ads do then?
- BigManOnCampus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Television is a cancer on society, can we get rid of it?
- Brocclibob, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0@ above post
I would take anything that woudlnt cause me permanent harm, if it cured cancer.
3 cheers for the scientists. More if they get it done. This will be very good EXTREMELY GOOD. -
Show 51 - 64 of 64 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is