If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NYPost)   Study: ♪ ♫ Everything...gives you cancer, everything ♪ ♫   (nypost.com) divider line 43
    More: Dumbass, Dr. Jonathan D. Schoenfeld, Don't Bother, clinical nutrition, baked goods, statistical significance, deodorant, orange juice, carbs  
•       •       •

2196 clicks; posted to Geek » on 25 Mar 2013 at 6:02 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



43 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-03-24 09:22:01 PM
Everything in the world is bad for you, and the only cure is everything else.
 
2013-03-24 09:24:12 PM
But I read it on the internet. And you can't put anything on the internet if it isn't true.
Gotta go, my date's here. She's a French supermodel.
 
2013-03-24 09:35:25 PM
are you saying there's no cure, there's no answer, subby?
 
2013-03-24 10:11:56 PM
100 per cent of men who reach age 100 have prostrate cancer.
kill yourself now.
 
2013-03-24 10:14:12 PM

elvisaintdead: are you saying there's no cure, there's no answer, subby?


There will NEVER be a cure for cancer.

Do you know why?

www.phdcomics.com

If someone tells you they know the "truth" about "cures for cancer", or that they have a "cure", run away from them. Run very, very far away from them.
 
2013-03-24 10:59:11 PM
Don't touch that dial.  Don't try to smile.  Just take this pill.  It's in your file.
 
2013-03-24 11:19:38 PM
Every single element has a half-life, and is therefore, to some degree, radioactive. So stay from that.
 
2013-03-25 01:04:39 AM
You know what increases your chances of getting cancer more than pretty much anything? Aging.

Stop getting older and you're way ahead of the avoiding cancer game.

/Or, as my brother put it so many years ago: "eating will kill you, not eating will kill you faster. Your choice."
 
rpl
2013-03-25 06:18:10 AM
Don't play the piano, either!
 
2013-03-25 06:44:46 AM

FriarReb98: Everything in the world is bad for you, and the only cure is everything else.


I tell my health nut friends this, and they usually don't respond or change the subject.
 
2013-03-25 06:47:38 AM
And that shiat you ate for breakfast? Well it'll only give you cancer!
 
2013-03-25 06:54:44 AM
Lies, damn lies, and statistics.
 
2013-03-25 07:05:04 AM
Unfortunate even if we transcend our bodies like Ray Kurzweil believes some form of digital cancer will pop up. Then again even if it didn't we'd still eventually die anyway.
 
2013-03-25 07:07:35 AM
Well, cancer is more the... I don't want to say "symptom", but it's a result of something going wrong more than it's something going wrong in itself.  As you age, the probability of getting cancer approaches 1, because it's the result of any of a billion things that could go wrong.
 
2013-03-25 07:08:53 AM

This About That: Every single element has a half-life, and is therefore, to some degree, radioactive. So stay from that.


There actually is such a thing as stable elements.

/Don't take life so seriously, no one gets out of it alive.
 
2013-03-25 07:46:44 AM

hardinparamedic: If someone tells you they know the "truth" about "cures for cancer", or that they have a "cure", run away from them. Run very, very far away from them.


That is the best goddamn explanation of cancer and difficulty of cancer research I have ever farking seen.

/Cancer researcher
 
2013-03-25 07:53:54 AM
Still no cure from fearmongering.
 
2013-03-25 08:11:26 AM
Five dollar bills? Give you cancer!

/ maybe not the same song
// Skeleton Dick ftw!
 
2013-03-25 08:11:49 AM
Well if God would just stop creating it people wouldn't have to deal with it so I say the cure for cancer is this: Pray harder.

Get to it Christians!
 
2013-03-25 08:25:37 AM
Don't bother trying to parse these studies - some of which contradict each other. In order to do so, you'd either have to spend time in front of your computer or call someone on your cellphone, and either one of those insidious devices will give you cancer. They will. Again, science.

i224.photobucket.com
 
2013-03-25 08:35:33 AM
On the other hand, cancer cures everything.
 
2013-03-25 08:53:20 AM
Ah, NY Post logic:  Not everything is equally a threat, and some things aren't as much of a threat as they tell you, therefore, nothing is a threat, you've been hoodwinked by a nanny state that seeks total and ultimate power by...um...scaring you with cancer threats.  So ignore it all, and please patronize our sponsors.  USA! USA!
 
2013-03-25 09:14:19 AM

hardinparamedic: If someone tells you they know the "truth" about "cures for cancer", or that they have a "cure", run away from them. Run very, very far away from them.


Um, so it's a class of diseases and it's dynamic.  This is news to. . . who, exactly?  The scope of the problem is so broad that "cure for cancer" makes about as much sense as a single tool advertised as capable of performing any sort of car repair.  And yeah, it's hard.  When was frontier research ever supposed to be easy?  Aside from the obvious stuff like knowledge and rigor, the secret ingredient to success in research isn't ambition; it's patience.
 
2013-03-25 09:32:11 AM
Like I needed another rationalization to continue doing the things I enjoy, but I'll take it.
 
2013-03-25 09:34:17 AM
This is only an opinion because the media reports studies that test cancer growth in laboratory environments and not in actual living beings. Then about 90% of them are not repeatable in testing and disproven, but that rarely makes the news.
 
2013-03-25 09:43:07 AM
White mice cause cancer.
 
2013-03-25 10:18:44 AM
"People aren't rats."

Ever read a fark politics or religion thread?
 
2013-03-25 10:45:51 AM

dragonchild: hardinparamedic: If someone tells you they know the "truth" about "cures for cancer", or that they have a "cure", run away from them. Run very, very far away from them.

Um, so it's a class of diseases and it's dynamic.  This is news to. . . who, exactly?  The scope of the problem is so broad that "cure for cancer" makes about as much sense as a single tool advertised as capable of performing any sort of car repair.  And yeah, it's hard.  When was frontier research ever supposed to be easy?  Aside from the obvious stuff like knowledge and rigor, the secret ingredient to success in research isn't ambition; it's patience.


That's an interesting point. There is a single tool that while not performing car repair per se, will correct any car problems.

That tool is a bank account with which to buy a new car.

If you could transfer your consciousness to a younger, healthier body, you'd have a cure for all cancer.
 
2013-03-25 10:51:58 AM

dragonchild: Um, so it's a class of diseases and it's dynamic.  This is news to. . . who, exactly?



It's news to the almost entire general population. It's why "still no cure for cancer" is a meme, because idiots don't understand how complex or think it's one big conspiracy by pharmaceutical companies (because, you know, they're withholding the pill that magically reverses rouge cell mutation because they're dicks). It's why people thinking they can buy a ribbon and that actually helps things. Or scammers preying on the stupid and/or vulnerable by claiming it can be cured by a new miracle vaccine or drinking nothing but this exact blend of grapefruit and celery juice.
 
2013-03-25 10:53:47 AM
The world is full of poorly developed, agenda driven science. I already knew that.

Science as advertising for profit.
 
2013-03-25 11:03:47 AM

GilRuiz1: Don't bother trying to parse these studies - some of which contradict each other. In order to do so, you'd either have to spend time in front of your computer or call someone on your cellphone, and either one of those insidious devices will give you cancer. They will. Again, science.

[i224.photobucket.com image 700x377]


The problem here isn't science or the nature of scientific research, it is a combination of 1) Horribly inept science/health reporting by the media and 2) the nature of scientific funding.

The issue with 2 is that as a researcher, reliant on grant dollars, you need to make your work sound sexy and exciting. Of course it is sexy and exciting to you and people in your field, maybe even to the broader scientific community, but it is hard to make really complicated issues that take years of study to even remotely understand sound sexy and exciting to the general public. So many scientists, not ever being trained in communicating science to the lay public, often over sell and over simplify. Worse though is issue 1. Most science/health reporters don't have backgrounds in science, or only very minimal ones. So they can't act as an appropriate intermediary. Someone that the scientists can give a semi-technical explanation to who can then word it appropriately to a lay audience.

Lot of studies in science fail to be replicated, or the results don't hold up under more detailed work, that is the provisional nature of research. Scientists implicitly understand this, and most papers couch their results appropriately. We know it takes repeated findings to hammer out a good idea of what is going on. But these provisional results get reported in the news with "ZOMG X Causes Y! Be Afraid! Buy this superfruit!"
 
2013-03-25 11:20:52 AM
this just in.. reading articles on the ny post about cancer gives you cancer.

/use common sense and you can probly be cancer free for 70-80 years and then the body degrades rapidly.
 
2013-03-25 12:54:57 PM

hardinparamedic: elvisaintdead: are you saying there's no cure, there's no answer, subby?

There will NEVER be a cure for cancer.

Do you know why?

[www.phdcomics.com image 600x1431]

If someone tells you they know the "truth" about "cures for cancer", or that they have a "cure", run away from them. Run very, very far away from them.


actually that's old information.  There are starting to be some actual "cures" for specific kinds of cancers (like that one where they genetically reprogrammed Lukemia patients' t-cells to attack and destroy their B-cells which carry the disease.  One guy went from being in end stage to utterly cancer-free in 8 DAYS)
and there is some extremely innovative work being done in how to target the things all "cancers" have in common, which is to say rapid proliferation and blood vessel growth to feed the tumors.  Take away their ability to do that and they die, and you have , effectively "cured" the patient's cancer
 
2013-03-25 01:26:16 PM

Magorn: which is to say rapid proliferation and blood vessel growth to feed the tumors. Take away their ability to do that and they die, and you have , effectively "cured" the patient's cancer


Now I'm curious.  My boss told me this week that one problem with angiogenesis inhibitors is their finding the cancer cells increase their rate and frequency of metastases.  Ie, if they can't get food where they are, they move to where the food is.  I'll try to get references, in case he's full of it, but I wouldn't take inhibition of angiogenesis to be the panacea it has been marketed as just yet (there are too many mechanisms for a hungry cancer to get food, and they seem to be independent of one another).  If you're motivated enough, feel free to post any positive studies you've seen.  [Err...since this is FARK, I'm pointing out that I'm not picking a fight; I do this stuff for a living (my own little niche) and like to discuss it].

The cellular reprogramming is cool, and it's recent success is encouraging.  The Debbie Downer in me would point out that leukemias have historically been more sensitive to treatment, and that this may not be effective versus solid tumors, but it's sure as hell proven more effective that gene targeting.  First pass liver metabolism:  "I was just trying to help".
 
2013-03-25 01:41:05 PM

born_yesterday: Magorn: which is to say rapid proliferation and blood vessel growth to feed the tumors. Take away their ability to do that and they die, and you have , effectively "cured" the patient's cancer

Now I'm curious.  My boss told me this week that one problem with angiogenesis inhibitors is their finding the cancer cells increase their rate and frequency of metastases.  Ie, if they can't get food where they are, they move to where the food is.  I'll try to get references, in case he's full of it, but I wouldn't take inhibition of angiogenesis to be the panacea it has been marketed as just yet (there are too many mechanisms for a hungry cancer to get food, and they seem to be independent of one another).  If you're motivated enough, feel free to post any positive studies you've seen.  [Err...since this is FARK, I'm pointing out that I'm not picking a fight; I do this stuff for a living (my own little niche) and like to discuss it].

The cellular reprogramming is cool, and it's recent success is encouraging.  The Debbie Downer in me would point out that leukemias have historically been more sensitive to treatment, and that this may not be effective versus solid tumors, but it's sure as hell proven more effective that gene targeting.  First pass liver metabolism:  "I was just trying to help".


Yeah Lukemia is an easy one because it targets very specific cells, but I'm still not jaded enough about technology to not realize that using an old virus to re-program a patient's own T-cells to turn them into, effectively, "living drugs"  is cool as all hell and then some.  That's true "Science fiction" type stuff, or would have been 20 years ago.  Now the "Cytokine storm" reaction that occurs when you set one part of your body's immune system to kill another is pretty nasty, but that at least can be medically controlled.

Hadn't read the very latest on angiogenesis  inhibitors, but I'll see what I can dig up.  I'm not a medical professional , but I read a lot about this because a very rich employer fo Grandad's got him into Sloan-kettering in the 50's when he got lung cancer, as a result, my mom the nurse has been a very generous contributor to them over the years, and they are constantly sending her (and me because apparently donations were once made in my name) research bulletins
 
2013-03-25 01:50:18 PM
I used to joke with my fiancée that breathing and everything else leads to cancer, so why worry about it. Statistical, everyone eventually gets cancer. Then I got cancer at age 33. Having experienced the hell that is chemo and the constant fear of post treatment relapse, I can say you should probably care.

There never will be a cure for cancer. Most types will eventually be curable, many already are. But each patient's biology is unique, so every cancer is unique. My type of lymphoma is curable, but not everyone survives. I was even told not to pay attention to statistics by my oncologist, he said they are meaningless.
 
2013-03-25 01:54:56 PM
"Figlio di puttana, sai che tu sei un pezzo di merda?
Hm? You think you're cool, right? Hm? Hm?
When you kicked out people out of your house
I tell you this, one of three Americans die of cancer,
You know? Asshole. You're gonna be one of those.
I don't have the courage
To kick your ass directly.
Don't have enough courage for that,
I could, you know.
You know you're gonna have another accident?
You know I'm involved with black magic?
fark you. Die. Bastard.
You think you're so cool, hm? Asshole.
And if I ever see your farking face around,
In Europe or Italy,
Well I'll, that time I'm gonna kick your ass.
fark you. farking Americans, Yankee.
You're gonna die outta cancer, I promise.
Bang bang, deep pain
No one does what you did to me.
You wanna know something? fark you.
I want your balls smashed, eat shiat. Bastard.
Pezzo di merda, figlio di puttana.
I hope somebody in your family dies soon.
Crepa, pezzo di merda, e vai
A sucare cazzi su un aereo!"
 
2013-03-25 02:28:27 PM

Magorn: Yeah Lukemia is an easy one because it targets very specific cells, but I'm still not jaded enough about technology to not realize that using an old virus to re-program a patient's own T-cells to turn them into, effectively, "living drugs" is cool as all hell and then some. That's true "Science fiction" type stuff, or would have been 20 years ago.


I'm envious of your enthusiasm.  I need to get myself into a more positive work environment so I can lose some of this jadedness (jading?).  As the cartoon above mentioned, years of research without seeming to make any impact, combined with the egotistical, intellectual dick-waving, is becoming tiresome.

A line of research I heard about a few months back was pretty cool, too.  Cancer cells produce very high levels of lactic acid, levels that would be toxic to most cells.  This researchers idea was to restore transport of lactic acid back into the tumor cells.  Metabolically, they would have two choices: die, or quit burning glucose so fast and inefficiently.  That's what I work on right now; cancer cell metabolism, and trying to identify metabolic targets to "throw a monkey wrench" into the cancer cell's growth machinery.  It's the new hotness at the NIH (this philosophy, not my work); let's hope these lines of research can identify some new mechanisms to target.
 
2013-03-25 02:44:45 PM
"... and don't play that piano."
 
2013-03-25 03:44:04 PM

born_yesterday: Magorn: Yeah Lukemia is an easy one because it targets very specific cells, but I'm still not jaded enough about technology to not realize that using an old virus to re-program a patient's own T-cells to turn them into, effectively, "living drugs" is cool as all hell and then some. That's true "Science fiction" type stuff, or would have been 20 years ago.

I'm envious of your enthusiasm.  I need to get myself into a more positive work environment so I can lose some of this jadedness (jading?).  As the cartoon above mentioned, years of research without seeming to make any impact, combined with the egotistical, intellectual dick-waving, is becoming tiresome.

A line of research I heard about a few months back was pretty cool, too.  Cancer cells produce very high levels of lactic acid, levels that would be toxic to most cells.  This researchers idea was to restore transport of lactic acid back into the tumor cells.  Metabolically, they would have two choices: die, or quit burning glucose so fast and inefficiently.  That's what I work on right now; cancer cell metabolism, and trying to identify metabolic targets to "throw a monkey wrench" into the cancer cell's growth machinery.  It's the new hotness at the NIH (this philosophy, not my work); let's hope these lines of research can identify some new mechanisms to target.


get on with your bad self, that's cool as hell.   I'm proud of some of the work I've done in my life, but I doubt I'll do anything 1/100th as meaningful as what you are working on right now.   The thing to remember is EVERYONE, all of us, put up with assholes at work and bosses who are dicks, but very few get to say they are doing so for anything much more meaningful than earning  their next paycheck.  When you get to tell the story of YOUR life, however, in the  immortal words of Gen. Patton: "You may be thankful that twenty years from now when you are sitting by the fireplace with your grandson on your knee and he asks you what you did in the great War, you WON'T have to cough, shift him to the other knee and say, "Well, your Granddaddy shoveled shiat in Louisiana."
 
2013-03-25 07:19:50 PM
Cancer is caused by several different cellular mutations, usually brought on by excessive cell death and regrowth.

Anything that causes cell death and regrowth can cause cancer.

The HPV virus attacks the cervix cells over and over again, and can eventually lead to cancer.  Smoking kills lung cells, and can eventually lead to cancer.  Suntanning kills skin cells.  Etc., etc., etc., etc., etc.

/not even a frelling doctor; look it up on Wikipedia
 
2013-03-26 12:03:13 AM

MorrisBird: Don't touch that dial.  Don't try to smile.  Just take this pill.  It's in your file.


Love me some Joe!
 
2013-03-26 01:55:42 AM
We have polluted our environment to the point where air and water cause cancer. There's no place to go to get away from it. And yet we keep pumping out more filth and destruction every day, this is what we call PROGRESS!
 
Displayed 43 of 43 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report