Notices
Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Is there a cure for cancer???

  1. #1 Is there a cure for cancer??? 
    New Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1
    Just wanted to know if there is a cure for cancer out there. So if you know please answer


    ...............................
    Squid
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    墨子 DaBOB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,674
    Cancer is just a word. The disease itself is much more complex. There is no single cause and no single cure. Therefor the best "cure" is to live as healthily as you can. If the cancer has already set in then the individual must work very hard at becoming extremely healthy.

    In time our bodies become obsolete. If this is the cause of the cancer than I don't know what to tell you. Maybe you can practice lots of yoga and learn how to live forever, then join the dark side and actually do it.


    Do not try and bend the spoon. That's impossible. Instead... only realize the truth. There is no spoon. Then you'll see that it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself. -Spoon Boy
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,120
    'Time is the space between birth and death' by me.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Moderator Moderator AlexP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    1,838
    As sad as it is, there's no simple cure for cancer. There are however, numerous treatments (depending on the type of cancer) that can work pretty well.
    "There is a kind of lazy pleasure in useless and out-of-the-way erudition." -Jorge Luis Borges
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Junior Powerdoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    270
    Cancer is the uncontrolled spread of altered cells.
    That's said, there is many different process that lead to this uncontrolled spread.
    There is also various type of altered cell, wich are less or more prone to be destroyed by different treatments.
    Some cells does not support X ray, while other are destroyed by some reciepies of chemotherapy. Some others cells may be destroyed by the immune system.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    16
    No, at least not yet.
    Cancer is a buzzword that has been overused to describe a very complex set of disease, not just one disease. Arguably, cancer is set of million individual diseases, each unique in their own way, thus finding a universal cure is downright impossible.
    Prevention is always the best treatment with changes in diet, excerise, cleaning of environmental contaminants, not smoking and what-not. Actual treatment of a cancer that is already present is difficult because, we are fighting alterations in the growth of our own bodies, which is very different than fighting a foreign microbe. It is extremely difficult to find a drug that would obliterate the cancer and not destroy the body as well.
    Research scientists are doing their best to find new preventative and therapeutic means to fight cancer. They are doing their best.

    Hey Check out my blog www.uncomplicatedscientist.blogspot.com.

    and maybe you can click on some cancer foundation websites that I have linked to the bottom of the site and donate some money. Anything would help these foundations.
    Thanks
    After walking through the streets of this world, I swear I will never eat off my shoes again. A quirky scientist like us all www.uncomplicatedscientist.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Masters Degree samcdkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    640
    Previously people had a short life span; the insults that accumulate in the cell and lead to chromosomal changes that interfere with normal cell cycle progression were never an issue, since before they reached that point people died.

    Cancer is a disease of affluence, of increased lifespan and increased chromosomal insults. Now people live long enough to see the effects of these damages, to reproduce at a later age, when these damages can be transmitted.

    To cure cancer would mean to halt the unrestrained growth of the cells, its a delicate mechanism that means increasing cell death. There are many approaches out in the field, the one I am interested in is nanotechnology derivatives that specifically zap the cancerous cells.

    Prevention is another approach with promise, where you minimise the abuse and increase the protection; a healthy diet and lifestyle.

    But no clear answers yet.
    Homeland Security Advisory System: RED
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,232
    Let's just get the definition of cancer right. Is it larger than normal cells that keep on dividing until it interferes with some natural process in the body?

    I’ve read that researchers are looking for a way to keep the cells from “asking” for more blood vessels to be built to support its appetite. Another thing I’ve heard is a certain viral infection that has produced some promising results in cancer in mice. Does anyone know about this?
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Masters Degree samcdkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    640
    Normal cells go through a cell cycle; in one of the phases of the cycle, the newly replicated cell DNA is checked for errors due to mutations, carcinogens, free radicals and such.

    Sometimes the detetcted anomalies can be repaired by repair enzymes, sometimes they cannot. Under normal circumstances, anomalous cells should be destroyed. However they may pass through the cell cycle or are allowed to pass through. Other times, they are not recognised and continue to grow regardless of damage.

    DNA repair:
    human repair enzymes recognize a common form of DNA damage called an abasic lesion. These lesions occur when a stretch of DNA loses one of its constituent bases, leaving a gap in the chain. Such lesions arise spontaneously more than 10,000 times per day in every cell. They can also be caused by exposure to pesticides, food mutagens, and ionizing radiation from the sun. If unrepaired, the damage can lead to disease, notably cancer, through a mutation in the genetic code.
    Bypassing DNA damage:
    A newly discovered enzyme described by University of Pittsburgh researchers in a study published online today, is believed to play a key role in maintaining the integrity of a cell's genetic information – the basis by which the life of a cell or species is preserved – by allowing its DNA to be replicated despite discovery of a mishap on the sequence that it corrects with a new mistake. Its sophisticated yet quick-fix tactics, employed at a most critical time, when typically damage can halt replication altogether, may save the cell from near certain death. Harnessing its unique capabilities could have implications for treating some cancers.

    In the paper posted on the Web site of The EMBO Journal, an official journal of the European Molecular Biology Organization, the researchers describe how DNA polymerase Q, or POL-Q, has the exceptional ability to bypass damaged spots in the DNA sequence that are caused by a cell's normal wear and tear or other abuses. In addition, it is the only known enzyme that orchestrates not only one, but two steps involved in bypassing common types of DNA damage.
    These damaged cells may not progress normally through the life cycle and may become immortal and grow abnormally, they also do not die as they are supposed to (through the process of apoptosis). These cells which are incapable of dying or grow unregulated, are cancer cells.

    More:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancer
    Homeland Security Advisory System: RED
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER
    Let's just get the definition of cancer right. Is it larger than normal cells that keep on dividing until it interferes with some natural process in the body?

    I’ve read that researchers are looking for a way to keep the cells from “asking” for more blood vessels to be built to support its appetite. Another thing I’ve heard is a certain viral infection that has produced some promising results in cancer in mice. Does anyone know about this?
    This "asking" for blood vessels is known as angiogenesis. By blocking angiogenesis it is thought that the cancer would not be able to grow properly, thus the tumor would only be able to reach a certain size. There are some drawback to this therapy. By blocking the growth of blood vessels, this can in theory damage normal healing mechanisms within the body. Additionally by ceasing blood flow into the tumor, this may also inhibit the means of important chemotherapeutic drugs from reaching the tumor to kill the necessary cells.

    It is also difficult to say what inhibiting angiogenesis would have on the formation of metastasis, secondary tumors that generally lead to the death of the patient. While cancer is treatable, it won't be until we truly master the underlying mechanisms of metastasis can cancer be a disease which we could actually live with.

    www.uncomplicatedscientist.blogspot.com
    After walking through the streets of this world, I swear I will never eat off my shoes again. A quirky scientist like us all www.uncomplicatedscientist.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Masters Degree samcdkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    640
    There have been some results with blocking VEGF expression in cancer cell models, but has it been seen in human clinical trials?
    Homeland Security Advisory System: RED
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    16
    There are many anti-VEGF molecules that have gone through clinical trials and have shown some promise, but not nearly as much as was originally hoped. VEGF signaling is very complex. And while these new treatments are being developed, they are not universal for all cancer types. I'm not fully briefed on all facets of clinical trials involving anti-VEGF molecules, but by checking out the FDA website, you probably can gain some more insight. Unfortunately when dealing cells, things are usually more simple than when dealing with an entire organism. Hope this helps.

    www.uncomplicatedscientist.blogspot.com
    After walking through the streets of this world, I swear I will never eat off my shoes again. A quirky scientist like us all www.uncomplicatedscientist.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Masters Degree samcdkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    640
    Don't I know it? I work with rodents btw.
    Homeland Security Advisory System: RED
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •