Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(MIT Technology Review)   DNA-sequencing of routine blood tests could find cancer tumors so early they could be removed before they cause any trouble. But technically, still no cure for cancer   (technologyreview.com) divider line 23
    More: Cool  
•       •       •

978 clicks; posted to Geek » on 12 Aug 2014 at 11:09 AM (46 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



23 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-08-12 08:08:29 AM  
A good start though.
 
2014-08-12 11:11:05 AM  
Here comes the science....
 
2014-08-12 11:26:28 AM  
BRB, buying Illumina stock.
 
2014-08-12 11:48:31 AM  
Since I've already survived melanoma and colorectal due to early detection and surgery, I getting kicks, etc.

/12 and 10 years clear, respectively
 
2014-08-12 11:52:33 AM  
How much will it cost?
 
2014-08-12 11:58:58 AM  
It's also going to catch false paternity. Estimates vary widely, anywhere between 4% and 35% of kids whose paternity has never been in question are being raised by someone who isn't their biological father. When we're all getting DNA sequencing as part of our routine healthcare, that's going to be a huge social issue.

/Also, lots of people who are "1/16th Cherokee" are going to find out that, no, they're not
 
2014-08-12 12:03:11 PM  
images.posterjunction.com
 
2014-08-12 12:11:43 PM  
Isn't this what got 23 and Me in trouble with the Feds, doing medical guesswork along with ancestral DNA tests?
 
2014-08-12 12:13:22 PM  
Brilliant!  The NSA has been working for years on how to get everyone in the country into a DNA database.
 
2014-08-12 01:07:15 PM  

EngineerAU: It's also going to catch false paternity. Estimates vary widely, anywhere between 4% and 35% of kids whose paternity has never been in question are being raised by someone who isn't their biological father. When we're all getting DNA sequencing as part of our routine healthcare, that's going to be a huge social issue.

/Also, lots of people who are "1/16th Cherokee" are going to find out that, no, they're not


No, it wouldn't.  Questions of paternity/maternity/relatedness could only be answered if they compared your sequence to that of your parents.  And there would be no reason to make such a comparison while doing this sort of cancer screening - they're just looking for common cancer mutations, big copy number variants, translocations and fusion genes - that sort of thing.  There would be no need or reason to also sequence your parents and compare to them.

Moreover, deep sequencing would be super overkill for a paternity test anyway.  You don't need Gigabytes of genome sequence from you and your Dad to establish definitively whether or not he's really your father.  A limited number of SNPs or other polymorphic markers would do the trick.
 
2014-08-12 01:21:46 PM  
Well, prevention is the best treatment.
 
2014-08-12 01:26:44 PM  
Could! Could! Or may be not... The technique is not yet developed.

EngineerAU: Estimates vary widely, anywhere between 4% and 35% of kids whose paternity has never been in question are being raised by someone who isn't their biological father. When we're all getting DNA sequencing as part of our routine healthcare, that's going to be a huge social issue.


Yeah, those fathers would have to learn to live with it. My heart weeps for them and stuff.
 
2014-08-12 01:48:26 PM  

Grahor: Could! Could! Or may be not... The technique is not yet developed.

EngineerAU: Estimates vary widely, anywhere between 4% and 35% of kids whose paternity has never been in question are being raised by someone who isn't their biological father. When we're all getting DNA sequencing as part of our routine healthcare, that's going to be a huge social issue.

Yeah, those fathers would have to learn to live with it. My heart weeps for them and stuff.


My kids would learn to deal with mommy and daddy getting divorced.  They'd still be my children, but the cheating whore would have to go.
 
2014-08-12 02:21:10 PM  

lilbjorn: Brilliant!  The NSA has been working for years on how to get everyone in the country into a DNA database.


Oh man, I can hardly wait for my tea bagger friends' FB posts.
 
2014-08-12 04:05:40 PM  
The health care system will never allow this to happen.

If you kill cancer before it begins, they can't embezzle around 100,000 bucks out of your insurance company before you die.

Modern health care is not about the cure, it is about treating the symptoms until you are no longer a economic benefit to them. Then you die.
 
2014-08-12 04:27:07 PM  

Doc Daneeka: EngineerAU: It's also going to catch false paternity. Estimates vary widely, anywhere between 4% and 35% of kids whose paternity has never been in question are being raised by someone who isn't their biological father. When we're all getting DNA sequencing as part of our routine healthcare, that's going to be a huge social issue.

/Also, lots of people who are "1/16th Cherokee" are going to find out that, no, they're not

No, it wouldn't.  Questions of paternity/maternity/relatedness could only be answered if they compared your sequence to that of your parents.  And there would be no reason to make such a comparison while doing this sort of cancer screening - they're just looking for common cancer mutations, big copy number variants, translocations and fusion genes - that sort of thing.  There would be no need or reason to also sequence your parents and compare to them.

Moreover, deep sequencing would be super overkill for a paternity test anyway.  You don't need Gigabytes of genome sequence from you and your Dad to establish definitively whether or not he's really your father.  A limited number of SNPs or other polymorphic markers would do the trick.


The point isn't that this cancer screening would detect it, it's that DNA sequencing being an everyday medical test for a wide range of conditions would. It doesn't matter that it is overkill because the point is that the father wouldn't even be questioning paternity in the first place. But since many medical conditions are genetic, comparison of results between parents and children would happen. If a doctor discovers that a child is not related to the "father", would he have ground to intentionally hide this information from the child's parent?
 
2014-08-12 04:28:39 PM  

foxtail: The health care system will never allow this to happen.

If you kill cancer before it begins, they can't embezzle around 100,000 bucks out of your insurance company before you die.

Modern health care is not about the cure, it is about treating the symptoms until you are no longer a economic benefit to them. Then you die.


Insurance companies have lobbyists too. There's a reason why it's the law in most places that you have to wear your seat belt. One guess whose lobbyists pushed for those laws.
 
2014-08-12 07:17:42 PM  
If you can't cure it, preventing it is a good start.

It's what we already do with Rabies.  Rabies is incurable and has a nearly 100% mortality rate, but get a shot before the virus has a chance to mature in your system and you're good to go.
 
2014-08-12 10:18:51 PM  

Stone Meadow: Since I've already survived melanoma and colorectal due to early detection and surgery, I getting kicks, etc.

/12 and 10 years clear, respectively


:)   Glad to hear that!   Had dinner with my friend who has survived ovarian, colon, and liver cancer.   It always makes me happy to see her.  She's 9 years out.
 
2014-08-13 12:25:31 PM  

EngineerAU: foxtail: The health care system will never allow this to happen.

If you kill cancer before it begins, they can't embezzle around 100,000 bucks out of your insurance company before you die.

Modern health care is not about the cure, it is about treating the symptoms until you are no longer a economic benefit to them. Then you die.

Insurance companies have lobbyists too. There's a reason why it's the law in most places that you have to wear your seat belt. One guess whose lobbyists pushed for those laws.


Public health officers. Jesus Christ some of you are paranoid and dumb.

There's no money to be made in curing cancer. Sure. Fark off.
 
2014-08-13 01:47:06 PM  

StrikitRich: Isn't this what got 23 and Me in trouble with the Feds, doing medical guesswork along with ancestral DNA tests?


In short, no. What got 23andMe in trouble was that the FDA decided their test panel constituted as a medical device, which they did not have clearance for. I imagine that this type of test would undergo FDA clearance before being put to market. Another big difference is 23andMe is direct-to-consumer, meaning there is no doctor involved. I assume that this would be a diagnostic test ordered by a doctor, which has different FDA standards.
 
2014-08-13 02:06:18 PM  

foxtail: The health care system will never allow this to happen.


Wrong. This is already happening and is the entire point of diagnostics.

If you kill cancer before it begins, they can't embezzle around 100,000 bucks out of your insurance company before you die.

Having an accurate early detection test for cancer (which this is) is not the same as having a cure (which this is not). Nonethess, there's no reason why drug companies wouldn't aim to make drugs that are more effective, from both a moral and an economic perspective.

Modern health care is not about the cure, it is about treating the symptoms until you are no longer a economic benefit to them. Then you die.

You don't seriously believe this do you? The reason there is no single cancer "cure" is that cancer is not a single disease, and even the same type of cancer can have different causes. And the cause (as TFA says) is genetic mutation, which is a much more difficult problem to "cure" than it is to treat the effects of.
 
2014-08-13 09:04:04 PM  

Janusdog: Public health officers. Jesus Christ some of you are paranoid and dumb.

There's no money to be made in curing cancer. Sure. Fark off.


Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, is it?  My point was that cancer cures wouldn't be hidden because cancer costs insurance companies lots of money in the same way automobile wrecks cost lots more money when the occupants aren't wearing seat belts. Insurance companies have an incentive for cures to be found. Not sure why you decided to jump on me except maybe you're just a miserable person or a troll.
 
Displayed 23 of 23 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report