Cancer Cure? Anyone Know If This Is True?

[KewlKC07 0]

Ok...so...I was reading in a magazing about cures for all kinda of things, and supposedly theres already a cure for cancer...I don't know all the technical jargan and all that because I'm not like...a science genious, but it said something about the proteins that cancer is in block the medication so the medication can't get it, but if they take a BLANK H.I.V. cell, and put the cure in that, and give it to the person, the proteins will allow it through and ta da, its cured, is there any truth to this? Do anyone know?

[finaldesign1405241487 0]

hmm...try to refer to some google researching... It's possible, but Im not sure tough. But anyway if they find a cure to cancer it will probably be for specific "cancer" like breast cancer, and when they find cure for that, Im not sure that they can use the same cure for other types of cancer... So basicly it means, there is a whole bunch of research waiting to be done...
I started a little research via google and this is with what I came up:
http://www.1cure4cancer.com/
- These people claim that vitamine Vitamin B-17, "also know as Laetrile and Amygdalin" can stop cancer in persons body... That vitamine can be found in most of todays fruit, or apricots.
- they say if you have cancer, you can stop it and maybe even regenerate your organs (!) but of course, they are selling a book, (probably scam)

http://clark.pamrotella.com/
This people have something different theory:

We have all believed that cancer is a single disease.  That a malignant cell starts it all.  This is not true.  Cancer is two diseases.  Malignancy is the second and last disease to set in.  By curing this last disease, (malignancy), as we did in The Cure for All Cancers, the earlier disease becomes visible.  This earlier, first disease is tumor-growing.  It is a distinct and different disease from malignancy.  We have also believed that tumors, unless they are malignant, need not be feared, that they may be called benign, implying safety.  This is like a zebra on the African plains believing that a lion who is standing very still, nearby, need not be feared.  This, again, not true.

And if you just google a bit you will find just a bunch of "Herbal Cancer Treatments" so basicly I would say there is no CURE for cancer, there is just many similar types of treatmens for curing cancer, and a sad thig about all this is that, people just want to make money of it.

[iGuest 3]

I really dont believe that that is tru because we would have heard it every where not just in a magazine and second of all how do you empty a hiv cell?!?!

[EdgeXC 0]

I'm not a science genius either, but I'm sure there are ways to empty an HIV cell. I mean... we can do so many other miraculous things in medicine.I haven't heard anything about that kind of cure for cancer, I wouldn't rule out that it's false. Maybe the reason we haven't heard it on the news or from another source is because they're still working it out and don't want it to become too widespread and then not be able to deliver. I hope it's true, that would mean a whole new way of life for people with cancer.

[andrwxsCOL 0]

This is a nice option of tratament about cancer, The Protonterapia is a branch of the applied nuclear medicine in the treatment of malignant tumors. Its history goes back to 1954, and it was used exclusively in the investigation, when the American physicist Robert Wilson proposed his medical use. Since then, 40 thousand patients have been put under this treatment anywhere in the world. The protons, nuclei of hydrogen atoms, have a highest power load, and can almost cross the skin and weaves without damaging them, until arriving at the tumor. Sending them in beams to the 60 percent of the speed of the light (180,000 km/s) until the cancerous cells, these are destroyed almost without causing damage to healthy weaves. This that it sounds to miracle, has scientific base, but it is possible to ask itself if it represents a quantum jump in the oncología. Prof. Wolfgang Schlegel, director of the Depto. of Nuclear Medicine of the German Center of Oncológicas Investigations, with seat in Heidelberg, he explains that the protonterapia allows to direct with great exactitude the radiation dose, thus affects much less to adjacent weaves, and, therefore, to healthy organs. In addition, the dose arrives at the end of the route with their Maxima power -'Bragg Peak' -, unlike other known x-rays, like, for example, the one of x-rayses, rays range and photons, whose power diminishes proportionally to the depth of the tumor. "These advantages give positive results in certain inoperables cancers or difficult, increasing their bony possibilities of treatment, like in condroma and condrosarcoma craneales, some tumors, the carcinoma of prostate, and melanoma uveal, an ocular tumor. We still do not know if he is effective in the lung or breast cancer ", says the scientist. The health system prevents the wayNot yet there are sufficient clinical studies that they allow to know all the types tumors in which the proton therapy can give good results. According to the investigator, this therapy is not applied due to its cost, of 10 to 15 times massively higher than the conventional therapies, like the chemotherapy. At the same time, Schlegel accentuates that, at least in the case of the German system of health, it cannot to assume such costs without having statistics that verify their effectiveness. But, how to obtain results without applying the therapy? Some boxes of the German insurance of health become position of the treatment, but they will not do it with more patients until comparative studies do not exist. In the U.S.A. this is obtained with more rapidity, while in Germany the way is thorny and it advances with slowness, comments the oncólogo. The harmed one by this vicious circle is the patient. Without going very far, the protonterapia reduces to the minimum the risk of appearance of recidivas (secondary tumors) in the treatment of children and adolescents. Engineer Detlef Krischel is director of the technological company Accel Instruments, of Bergisch Gladbach, that produces the proton accelerator, the "Súperconductor Cyclotron". "the protonterapia is not applied to a greater number of patients due to the high cost of the equipment, of about 150 million euros each one", explains. Until the moment, only four clinics of integral treatment with protons work anywhere in the world: two in Japan, and two in the U.S.A.: one in Boston, Massachussets, and another one in Loma Linda, California. The Rinecker Proton Therapy Center, in Múnich, finishes entering operation. One specializes minimumly in invasive treatments and it is the first integral medical center in Europe that counts on an equipment of protonterapia for the attention of near 4,000 patients per year. This clinic is financed in private form. According to the engineer, already it was begun to construct one second plant in the clinic of Merheim, Colony, the "Rhein Proton Therapy Center", that will enter operation in 2007. Its cost: 180 million euros. The cost of the therapy by patient oscillates nevertheless between 17 and 20,000 euros, being smaller than the one of other x-rays. Profits are expected applying the protonterapiaIs the protonterapia a new hope in the cure of the cancer? "It is difficult to affirm it", says Prof. Schlegel. "Naturally, all we deposited great hopes in this treatment, but surely one is not the great miracle that could win badly completely this. The advances in the oncología are small steps that are added, and the protonterapia is, without a doubt, a very significant step ". "It is to wish that more treatments can be made in patients to be able to make the necessary studies, with which a greater economic support would be obtained to propagate this curativo method and to construct more centers of protonterapia. In the best one of the cases, if the boxes of health covered the treatment, the protonterapia would begin without a doubt to be used in greater measurement, since it is one of the most effective methods known until now in the fight against the cancer ", concludes the oncólogo.

[TJ213 0]

I doubt there is one cure for cancer, and if there was, and we discovered it, it would be all over the news. I remember a couple of months back WIRED magazine talked of a couple of ways to cure cancer that might be ready by 2025, but when there is a major discovery it will be all over the news.

[jcguy 0]

I believe that we are making great strides in the battle against cancer. With the rapid advances of genetic technology, for eg we have mapped the entire human genome, I belive that scientists are getting closer and closer to the root of the cancer problem and how to cure it. But it'll take quite some time though.

[Berserker 0]

Hi all,

Did you ever hear of smartcells. My wife is pregnant and she is due in June. I heard about smartcells in one of the pregnancy classes that we are following. Incidently, I also saw an advert on the Sunday newspaper, so I went to their website:

https://www.smartcells.com/

Do you think its a cure for cancer. Do you believe that this really works? Do you know of any experiences of friends?

Cheers

[illini319 0]

Let's not get carried away... a cure for "cancer", while something we all want, is still off in the future. A new and promising treatment for a subset of cancers? well that's a more accurate phrase for what you seem to have read. Certainly, the use of viruses as a vector for introducing some theraphy into specific cells, i.e. cancerous cells, have been in research for quite some time. In fact, there have been clinical studies examining this very therapy. All are still in research... and some have caused deaths... In any case, I just want to be clear that there is NO such thing as a cure for 'cancer,' as every cancer is quite literally a different disease state. The pathologies of any single cancer type (say... lung cancer) is so heterogeneous that it still isn't clear what initiated carcinogenesis (at a genetic level). So the idea of a cure for cancer, suggesting that cancer is a singular disease, is a naive one.

[Logan Deathbringer 0]

What you were talking about - using the shell of the HIV virus - and turning it into a cancer hunting virus is possibly true. UCLA announced this during February when they have sucessfully cure a mice with metaphasic melanoma with a modified strain of the HIV virus, without affecting the rodent with HIV.

Aside from modifying the virus, placement of the virus is also critial to the treatment. The virus has to be delivered to the tumour where it can effectively kill the cancer cells, then replicate, and kill more cancer cells - without activating the body immune system which would reject the virus and ultimately stop the treament.

Also, the scientists have given the virus different anti-body proteins so their coating automatically attatches to specific targets - in this case, cancer cells. However, human testing is not due for another couple of years, so a cure won't be in sight for another decade or so... probably.

The close timing of these breakthroughs speaks to the flurry of activity in the field of virotherapy, which exploits the tendency of viruses to attack cancer cells in a pitched battle that cancer often loses. With preliminary studies showing many of these viruses to be safe for humans, several universities and biotech firms are now conducting clinical trials of virotherapy.
As radical as it sounds, the idea of turning viruses loose on cancer actually predates the genetic technology that now fuels it. During the 1950s, scientists proved that adenovirus, a version of the common cold bug, was mildly effective against cervical cancer. But research was abandoned as chemotherapy gained prominence, and virotherapy was resurrected only after a study published in the journal Science in 1991 showed that a virus could be genetically modified to invade a tumor without inflicting disease.

The trick is to put the right virus in the right placeâin other words, to deliver it to the malignancy, where it must penetrate the cancer cells, replicate, kill the cells, and invade adjacent cancer cells in mounting numbersâall without triggering the body's immune response. Direct injection is the typical shortcut, but some regions of the body, including the brain, are hard to reach this way. Using intravenous administration is the ultimate goal, because it's noninvasive and catches metastasized cancer, but this method is more likely to trigger the body's defenses and repel the therapy before it arrives at its destination.

âThe immune system is the elephant in the room for the entire virotherapy field,â says Stephen Russell, director of the Mayo Clinic's molecular-medicine program. The engineered measles virus employed in the clinic's recent study was, in fact, administered successfully to mice via the bloodstreamâone of the first such instances. To outwit the body's defenses, Russell devised a âtargetedâ measles virus, modifying its genome to express an antibody that shepherds it directly to the tumor.

Likewise, the HIV strain in the UCLA melanoma study was targeted, and researchers have since tailored it to seek and destroy prostate and melanoma cancers. âBasically, we put different hooks on the virus so it can hold on to different molecules,â says Irvin S.Y. Chen, director of the UCLA AIDS Institute.

I got this from Popular science - this is the website.

Aside from breakthrough in Biotech, there are also other practical advances in cancer therapy.

Apparently, scientists have found a use for gold after all. First, they prepare the nano-shells, made from gold atoms and coated with silica. Then the nano-shells are injected into the blood, where they seek out the cancer cells and bind to their surface with anti-bodies. A near infra-red light pass through the healthy tissue without harming it, heats up the nano-shells and basically cooks the tumour it is attatched to.

And this I read from Popsci awhile ago, but found the article here.

However, most of the cancer treaments availble today, and the ones undergoing research at the moment are specifically targetting cancer turmors that are in one location which haven't spread to other parts of the body. I guess the best cure afterall is prevention and detection.

If you live a healthy lifestyle, and have a regular checkup once a year, it is more effective than any other cancer treatment that will ever be developed. (Even if there's a cure)

[illini319 0]

If you live a healthy lifestyle, and have a regular checkup once a year, it is more effective than any other cancer treatment that will ever be developed. (Even if there's a cure)

Most absolutely. Prevention, for any disease really, is key. Second to this is early prevention. It cannot be understated how important patient compliance and 'self' surveillance is. This is especially true for those with a family history of cancer. Perhaps another way is to take a more proactive approach. I've read that there is a growing idea, called chemoprevention, which touts that you can proactively supplement yourself to prevent and perhaps reverse tumors. Look into this if you all are interested; I know I will.

[Silex71405241522 0]

hmmm..iam not sure about this..but i heard about a laser cure method which concerning the laser shooting in order to distructing the diseased cells,..

[kgd2006 0]

Me and a friend was just talking about this the other day. We heard there was a test on a shark and how they injected the shark with something which cured the shark of cancer. Im not quite sure of the specifics but we were just amazed on how people come up with this type of stuff. I mean who would think that we could test a shark to slowly develop a theory to cure cancer.

[green_magi0 0]

Well in 1996 there was a cure for cancer created but 1 week after it was proven to b e a working cure the man dissapeared along with all of his research, same with a man named Nicoli Tesla who invented a free energy source called his "black box" from which he ran a car for a whole week without any gas tank or anything. The following weekend he dissapeared and his Labratory was burnt down by "unknown" arsenists.

[illini319 0]

can we please stop saying a 'cure for cancer' as if cancer is a singular disease with a singular solution...the greatest minds in our world are in the midst of interpreting the explosion of genomic data that has come to past in th recent years. as taxpayers you should all encourage the scientific enterprise as I can't imagine any other way to combat cancer. when we have administrations, as we currently have in the US, who are more apt to throw a bible at someone who has cancer (rather than having science help him) it becomes exceedingly difficult to find therapies for cancer. the scientific enterprise in the united states is at a terrible plateu due to decreased funding... because all the money is going to Iraq. Because, apparently, terrorism kills more people everyday than cancer.... figure that one out...