Scientists Destroy 99% of Cancer Cells in The Lab Using Vibrating Molecules
Scientists Destroy 99% of Cancer Cells in The Lab Using Vibrating Molecules
www.sciencealert.com
Scientists Destroy 99% of Cancer Cells in The Lab Using Vibrating Molecules
I can destroy 99% of cancer cells in a lab using a hammer. The important part is whether you can do the same in a person without killing them.
Or fire.
First thing that came to mind.
You'd think that it would be a might difficult getting a hammer into a body, but I salute you.
You don't need to. Just keep hammering away until you reach the cancer. Phase II trials start soon.
I would argue it is actually quite easy to get a hammer into a body. Precision and accuracy are the larger concerns.
You won't get it in there with that attitude.
The test was done on mice where half of them ended cancer free and I assume survived.
No lab mice survive the lab unfortunately.
Looks like an interesting choice, since they were already made to attach to cancer cells.
They work like an existing method, but with infrared light vs visible, which penetrates deeper into the body.
The thing about the used molecules is that they attach to the cancer more than other cells.
Apart from that you can concentrate the infrared light at the main clusters.
I'd say it is an improvement. Even if only the main clusters are destroyed it's noninvasive way to reduce the chance of mutation (less cancer cells means less chances for a mutation to gain chemo resistance).
I agree although the term used sounds like something stan lee coined.
Well, killing 99% of cancer cells is quite useless, the 1% left will now thrive and if they survived because they were different (and not just luckily escaping the treatment) you now have 100% of cancer cells you can't treat anymore.
Better case, the 1% "lucky" cancer cells just re-invade.
It could extend the life of the patient with a few years.
Best case scenario is that your immune system takes care of the final 1%. Worse case scenario is exactly as you described and you get mets that are resistant to therapy.
Have you read the article?
Yeah I’ve read the article and I’ve gone and had a little look at the scientific paper as well. The paper only mentions the effect of the molecule on cancer cells and does not mention what effect it has or may have on normal tissue. Interestingly for their mice model they delivered the drug intratumourally. To me this suggests that the drug is not selectively taken up by the tumour cells and they you need to get around this by limiting the delivery of the drug to the site of the cancer. This is just my speculation though. However, if true it would have implications on the practicality of using this method as a cancer therapy.