The treatment involves injecting billions of immune cells (T cells to be more precise), which have been programmed outside of the body, back into the patient to seek and destroy tumors.
The treatment involves injecting billions of immune cells (T cells to be more precise), which have been programmed outside of the body, back into the patient to seek and destroy tumors.
I wouldn't hold my breath. Cancer cures were promised 50 years ago, and every year since that, yet we keep pouring tons of money into it ... for ever and ever. Meanwhile we the people are being exposed to hundreds of carcinogens in our food and household products every day of the year ... year after year ... and then given extremely expensive, mostly useless treatments.
Just how stupid does a citizen have to be to not see what's really going on?
@bunnyknightsaid Cancer cures were promised 50 years ago,
But a cure wasn't promised any time soon by science, only by some over-optimistic over-hopeful people who typically didn't know enough about the science themselves. More than half of all cancers ARE cured these days (including my mum that survived cancer), but obviously science still has a long way to go because still many people continue to die of cancer. There will one day be cures for every cancer and without side effects too unpleasant; Its just a matter of how long and when. So it is definitely worth keep funding research into better cancer treatments. If I had loads of money (which I don't, at least not yet because that might well change in ~2 years time) I would give some of it to cancer research. I have given to charity before albeit not specifically to cancer research.
Yet another piece of promising research, this time to indirectly improve the effectiveness of older cancer treatments;
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-04-scientists-resistance-cancer-treatments.html
"...Researchers have enhanced a new method for inhibiting the protein HSP72, known to be important in helping cancer cells survive and resist treatment, which will help scientists move closer to discovering a new cancer drug that targets the protein.
Importantly, the scientists have also developed a test to measure how much more effective their new enhanced approach is compared with earlier attempts at stopping the action of HSP72. The scientists at The Institute of Cancer Research, London, found it was over 100 times more effective.
HSP72, or heat shock protein 72, is important in allowing cancer to take hold—it is responsible for silencing the instructions that normally tell a cancer cell to self-destruct, but it has proven difficult to find drugs to inhibit its function.
Targeting a key cancer protein
Scientists at the ICR have found an approach, which allows them to target HSP72 with a small molecule that forms a chemical bond, permanently destroying its activity and preventing HSP72 from working properly.
...
Targeted treatments against kinases have been highly successful in patient treatment but the cancer often evolves resistance to therapy—causing the drug to stop working. The new lysine targeting approach will aim to overcome this resistance and make tumours sensitive to the therapy again.
This study is just one of many happening at the ICR, which aims to overcome cancer's ability to evolve resistance to drug treatments.
..."
Any improvement in cancer treatment has to be a good thing.
What's going on is "Superquackery".
It's what happens when corporate industry monopolizes health-care, influences government agencies, and science takes a back seat. It's all about maximizing profit. Even the honest doctors are helpless, having to obey bureaucrats instead of science, otherwise they risk losing their license. This conflict of interest has been exposed decades ago by many investigators, including 60 Minutes, but its being conveniently ignored by today's corporate news media.
Why do you think the US has the highest health-care costs (over $4 trillion per year) while having the sickest population? Coincidence?
This conflict of interest has been exposed decades ago by many investigators, including 60 Minutes, but its being conveniently ignored by today's corporate news media.
Why do you think the US has the highest health-care costs (over $4 trillion per year) while having the sickest population? Coincidence?
My sister-in-law is battling cancer right now..it started in her lungs then spread to her hip area.. She was offered a new chemo drug that is experimental...the price is $17,000 dollars a bottle.. That is not a typo...seventeen thousand dollars for a 30 day supply..with no outlook as to how long the treatment will last.. so far, she has refused, and gone with an option her insurance will cover.. True story...
My cancer was large and aggressive, and it was treated with chemo drugs that were FDA-certified less than a year before my diagnosis. That was in 2003, when immunotherapy was experimental. I'm relieved that researchers are given the opportunity to cure some cancers, although I'd prefer that more varieties could be dealt with. Patients can't always hang around until someone produces a cure for their kind of cancer.
03 Apr '20 16:10
promising research into immunotherapy against cancer
Back to Top