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.

(Stanford University)   Scientists report they are nearly ready for human trials with a cure for cancer   (med.stanford.edu) divider line 35
    More: Spiffy, cure for cancer, cancer vaccine, human subject research, PhD student, T-cell, immune cells, vaccinations, cancers  
•       •       •

7908 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Jul 2013 at 8:34 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



35 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-07-10 08:39:02 AM
Still no cure for . . .

/oh, wait
 
2013-07-10 08:40:25 AM
Still no cure for cancer.

/I'm a stickler
 
2013-07-10 08:41:43 AM
But if they cure cancer what will happen to the entire cancer-treatment industry?
 
2013-07-10 08:44:12 AM
I saw this in a movie. Iit didn't turn out well.
 
2013-07-10 08:44:34 AM
assets.diylol.com
 
2013-07-10 08:46:02 AM
Quick...someone post the picture from V.
 
2013-07-10 08:46:36 AM

HotIgneous Intruder: But if they cure cancer what will happen to the entire cancer-treatment industry?


Cancer is obscenely adaptive; it's basically evolution run amok.  Look up Henrietta Lacks - her cancer cells survive, decades later, and fark up lab results around the world to this day.  Think microbes adapt quickly to antibiotics? They've got nothing on cancer.
 
2013-07-10 08:53:19 AM
"Don't-eat-me-bro"
 
2013-07-10 08:56:21 AM

Lexx: HotIgneous Intruder: But if they cure cancer what will happen to the entire cancer-treatment industry?

Cancer is obscenely adaptive; it's basically evolution run amok.  Look up Henrietta Lacks - her cancer cells survive, decades later, and fark up lab results around the world to this day.  Think microbes adapt quickly to antibiotics? They've got nothing on cancer.


But it's localized evolution, isn't it? Even if it evolves within one patient to be resistant to treatment XYZ, that doesn't mean future cancer in other people would have that. (Although it would suggest it could happen again independently).

I could be wrong though, I'm not a doctor.
 
2013-07-10 09:01:09 AM

Sgeo: Lexx: HotIgneous Intruder: But if they cure cancer what will happen to the entire cancer-treatment industry?

Cancer is obscenely adaptive; it's basically evolution run amok.  Look up Henrietta Lacks - her cancer cells survive, decades later, and fark up lab results around the world to this day.  Think microbes adapt quickly to antibiotics? They've got nothing on cancer.

But it's localized evolution, isn't it? Even if it evolves within one patient to be resistant to treatment XYZ, that doesn't mean future cancer in other people would have that. (Although it would suggest it could happen again independently).

I could be wrong though, I'm not a doctor.


True, it's localized, but since those cells multiple at a super fast rate, you could basically consider your body an ecosystem and the cancer to be a species, evolving a few orders of magnitude faster than regular organisms.
 
2013-07-10 09:02:25 AM

HotIgneous Intruder: But if they cure cancer what will happen to the entire cancer-treatment industry?


They will lobby their senators and news talking heads to fixate on a handful of manageable risks to bury the cure in FDA purgatory, all while proclaiming that they are protecting us thus saving the pharma companies, and hence the stock market, and hence the economy.

(See nuclear power)
 
2013-07-10 09:07:55 AM

HotIgneous Intruder: But if they cure cancer what will happen to the entire cancer-treatment industry?


Simple:
Cancer treatment with no guarantee of success = $300k
Cancer vaccination with no guarantee of success = $310k

"but how can you charge that much"
R&D:
R = $xMillions
D = $10xMillions
Unfortunately Development really means Market Development (read: advertising) not Product Development.
Big pharma spends a lot more on Sales salaries, "luncheons", "seminars", and koosh balls, pens, staplers, post-it notes etc with logo-imprints than they do on the actual lab/science behind the product.
 
2013-07-10 09:27:43 AM
Pro:

No more cancer.

Con:

Zombies.
 
2013-07-10 09:31:40 AM
1.bp.blogspot.com

What could possibly go wrong?
 
2013-07-10 09:32:15 AM
Regrettable that we would lose a beloved Fark cliche'.  We'd have to take comfort in the millions of lives saved, I guess...
 
2013-07-10 09:32:50 AM

abfalter: Regrettable that we would lose a beloved Fark cliche'.  We'd have to take comfort in the millions of lives saved, I guess...


*snerk* Nice.
 
2013-07-10 09:38:48 AM
www.monstersandcritics.com
 
2013-07-10 09:40:23 AM
R.I.P.

Jenny McCarthy

Antivaxxer, Fark Meme
 
2013-07-10 09:42:34 AM

HotIgneous Intruder: But if they cure cancer what will happen to the entire cancer-treatment industry?


Answer a question with a question department
Have you ever seen the Duckman episode where that pompous duck Docter discovers a cure for cancer in Duckman's head? Like that, only with more lawyers, accountants, sociopaths, etc.
 
2013-07-10 09:56:27 AM
Still no cure for humans.

/Greed and stupidity will always trump science and altruism.
 
2013-07-10 09:59:19 AM
http://www.cancer.org/fight/timeline

Sorry sack of assholes - It takes a certain kind of balls to celebrate the fact that you've been a dismal failure for one hundred years.

Did you know they still sell tobacco but they don't sell Cyclamates?
What's the difference I wonder.


Yeah the whole families dead from it - "Would you like to donate to the fight against cancer?"  "No, I'll need the money for bail- now shove off ."
 
2013-07-10 10:09:48 AM
Similar approaches have already been successful with leukemia.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6SzI2ZfPd4

/something in my eye, hang on a sec
 
2013-07-10 10:24:50 AM

Marcintosh: http://www.cancer.org/fight/timeline

Sorry sack of assholes - It takes a certain kind of balls to celebrate the fact that you've been a dismal failure for one hundred years.

Did you know they still sell tobacco but they don't sell Cyclamates?
What's the difference I wonder.


Yeah the whole families dead from it - "Would you like to donate to the fight against cancer?"  "No, I'll need the money for bail- now shove off ."


Dismal failure?  Just because they have not found a cure yet does not mean the effort is worthless.
 
2013-07-10 11:23:18 AM

HotIgneous Intruder: But if they cure cancer what will happen to the entire cancer-treatment industry?


This is the same logic that keeps us from having universal health care.
 
2013-07-10 11:54:52 AM

HotIgneous Intruder: But if they cure cancer what will happen to the entire cancer-treatment industry?


1) The people working on this don't work for the vast arrays of companies treating cancer.  They don't give a fark because if this works, they'll be Bill Gates rich.
2) "Cancer" isn't a single disease, like chicken pox, that you can just cure.  Cancer is like saying "bacteria" or "virus" and is really a ton of different diseases all similar.  This isn't going to cure all cancers. They're hoping that it will work on some blood cancers and solid tumors.
 
2013-07-10 12:09:00 PM
So they find a cure and guess who will be able to afford it? Not you.
 
2013-07-10 12:35:37 PM
The immune system only has a limited response against cancer cells. Because of the mutations that cancer cells accumulate, they basically can survive with the most farked-up genetic makeup in any human cell.  The treatment may be effective (and I hope it is), but without multiple methods of attack, you still risk some cells coming back and repopulating (kind of like antibiotic-resistant bacteria).  Also, different cancers express different molecules on their cell surfaces, so the treatment might work great against one cancer and be useless against another.

/Did a few years of cancer research in my younger days
 
2013-07-10 12:38:07 PM
"Scientists report they are nearly ready for human trials with a cure for cancer"

Let's not be too hasty, now.
 
2013-07-10 02:05:46 PM

Krustofsky: The immune system only has a limited response against cancer cells. Because of the mutations that cancer cells accumulate, they basically can survive with the most farked-up genetic makeup in any human cell.  The treatment may be effective (and I hope it is), but without multiple methods of attack, you still risk some cells coming back and repopulating (kind of like antibiotic-resistant bacteria).  Also, different cancers express different molecules on their cell surfaces, so the treatment might work great against one cancer and be useless against another.

/Did a few years of cancer research in my younger days


But apparently did not read the article which gave details that this focused on a single characteristic that all cancers seem to share....
 
2013-07-10 03:30:28 PM
To hell with this...where's the baldness cure they've been touting?
 
2013-07-10 03:36:19 PM
Uh... um... still no... er....

Flying cars?
farm6.staticflickr.com

Hover boards?
farm5.staticflickr.com

Um... robot maids?
i41.tinypic.com
 
2013-07-10 04:40:09 PM

Carn: Marcintosh: http://www.cancer.org/fight/timeline

Sorry sack of assholes - It takes a certain kind of balls to celebrate the fact that you've been a dismal failure for one hundred years.

Did you know they still sell tobacco but they don't sell Cyclamates?
What's the difference I wonder.


Yeah the whole families dead from it - "Would you like to donate to the fight against cancer?"  "No, I'll need the money for bail- now shove off ."

Dismal failure?  Just because they have not found a cure yet does not mean the effort is worthless.


I'm sorry, THEIR effort is worthless.  I cannot be assuaged over this.  To revel in a failed one hundred year search is one of the most offensive concepts I've ever heard of.  To be prideful that you're still toiling away at cancer after One Hundred Years tells me volumes about these people.
There is ONE pharmacy in the US of A that doesn't sell cigarettes ONE.  Do you know how I know that little fact?
BECAUSE IT MADE THE NATIONAL NEWS that how I know.  If you know that asbestos causes cancer why not get manufacturers to stop putting it in products like flooring and making siding with it and making certain workers exposed to it are safe guarded.  Do you think the ACS was behind any of this? No, because they're too busy standing at the mailbox waiting for the next big fat check to come.  They don't care who it comes from either.  Tobacco, the Government, and industry group, or Pharma or the soon-to-be bereaved.  "If you give us more money we stand a better chance of finding a cure"  "If we only had more money" or how about this chestnut "a cure is only five years away - a cure is only ten years away"  Notice how they don't say that anymore?  Because it's a joke, a bad joke and every single day people cling to that false hope.  Those left behind wonder if they'd given more even as their house goes up for sale if they'd only given more perhaps their loved one would still be alive.  It became like Fuel Cell technology that's always "ten short years away".  It's Ten short years if you have those years - sadly most don't.  Why is that?  Because it's taken One Hundred Years of Failed Work and One Hundred Years of Delusional Thinking.  The American Cancer Society is a very cruel and greedy business and make no mistake about it, finding a cure is far more ulcerative than having a cure.  I know a lot of business that haven't lasted one hundred years but by trading on fear the ACS is still going strong.
 
2013-07-10 04:42:27 PM
lucrative; with apologies
 
2013-07-10 05:20:07 PM

Marcintosh: Carn: Marcintosh: http://www.cancer.org/fight/timeline

Sorry sack of assholes - It takes a certain kind of balls to celebrate the fact that you've been a dismal failure for one hundred years.

Did you know they still sell tobacco but they don't sell Cyclamates?
What's the difference I wonder.


Yeah the whole families dead from it - "Would you like to donate to the fight against cancer?"  "No, I'll need the money for bail- now shove off ."

Dismal failure?  Just because they have not found a cure yet does not mean the effort is worthless.

I'm sorry, THEIR effort is worthless.  I cannot be assuaged over this.  To revel in a failed one hundred year search is one of the most offensive concepts I've ever heard of.  To be prideful that you're still toiling away at cancer after One Hundred Years tells me volumes about these people.
There is ONE pharmacy in the US of A that doesn't sell cigarettes ONE.  Do you know how I know that little fact?
BECAUSE IT MADE THE NATIONAL NEWS that how I know.  If you know that asbestos causes cancer why not get manufacturers to stop putting it in products like flooring and making siding with it and making certain workers exposed to it are safe guarded.  Do you think the ACS was behind any of this? No, because they're too busy standing at the mailbox waiting for the next big fat check to come.  They don't care who it comes from either.  Tobacco, the Government, and industry group, or Pharma or the soon-to-be bereaved.  "If you give us more money we stand a better chance of finding a cure"  "If we only had more money" or how about this chestnut "a cure is only five years away - a cure is only ten years away"  Notice how they don't say that anymore?  Because it's a joke, a bad joke and every single day people cling to that false hope.  Those left behind wonder if they'd given more even as their house goes up for sale if they'd only given more perhaps their loved one would still be alive.  It became like Fuel Cell technology that's always " ...


Ok, duly noted.  If they did find a cure and gave it away, would the end justify the means?
 
2013-07-10 06:54:41 PM
i39.tinypic.com
 
Displayed 35 of 35 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report