Canadian Scientists Cure Cancer... No One Notices?

Recommended Videos

House_Vet

New member
Dec 27, 2009
247
0
0
Quiet Stranger said:
I bet they've made plenty of cures for cancer over the years, it's just nobody wants to give it out cause they're all a bunch of greedy fat cats.
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH! Seriously? Look up Tim Minchin's beat poem Storm on Youtube - you sound just like her... Like it or not, we need tightly regulated, accountable, well researched pharmaceutical products. The only way you can get that at the moment is Big Pharma. Is it great? NO. Good? Hell NO. Necessary? Hell YES!
 

Rednog

New member
Nov 3, 2008
3,567
0
0
Spacewolf said:
Rednog said:
manythings said:
Owyn_Merrilin said:
Okay, my BS monitors are going off here. Mitochondria are a structure within the cell, not a type of cell. Further, they're essentially the powerplant of the cell; if cancer patients had non-functioning mitochondria, they'd be dead long before the cancer did anything. I'm going to have to see a more reliable source on this before I believe anything.
Mitochodria are a lot more complicated than other cell components. We inherit mitochodria through the X-chromosome and they seem pretty sure we shouldn't have mitochodria at all. It's, apparently, some kind of prehistoric passenger a group of ancestors (incredibly prehistoric) picked up that vastly improved the processing and release of energy on a cellular level. They're not claiming that all the mitochondria are broken just the ones in the cancer cells.
Err quick correction, I'm pretty sure mitochondria aren't coded on the X chromosome, I'm pretty sure you inherit mitochondria from your mother because it is the sperm entering the egg which has mitochondria inside it already, and the sperms mitochondria are only used for moving the sperm to the egg and are lost when they reach the egg. Also, I'm pretty sure mitochondria have their own DNA and have their own replication methods that are independent of our chromosomal replication.
x chromosome is from your mother if your male and you have two if your female one from each parent
Uhh how does this refute my claim?
Here straight quote from wiki: Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) is not transmitted through nuclear DNA (nDNA). In humans, as in most multicellular organisms, mitochondrial DNA is inherited only from the mother's ovum.
Mitochondria DNA has nothing to do with X chromosomes.
The end.
 

House_Vet

New member
Dec 27, 2009
247
0
0
Trolldor said:
House_Vet said:
Trolldor said:
This is far from reliable or plausible.
So read the paper itself! It's fully plausible, in vivo evidence and is well received and peer reviewed.
That's not what I was referring to.
My mistake - you can understand my frustration though, with quite a few people running their mouths about things they really know nothing about.
 

lacktheknack

Je suis joined jewels.
Jan 19, 2009
19,316
0
0
Kpt._Rob said:
And people wonder why I rail on about what a sick fucked up system privatized healthcare is. In a socialized healthcare system, where people come ahead of money, we'd have jumped all over this. Too bad we'd rather make money by holding people's own lives hostage until they fork up the dough for a treatment.
Then how come it wasn't picked up in Canada, where it was developed, where the healthcare is public?

Hell, I LIVE in Edmonton, I go to the University of Alberta, and I'd never heard of this until now.
 

OldNewNewOld

New member
Mar 2, 2011
1,494
0
0
SupabadMan said:
That's amazing.

Depressing, but amazing. Oh well.
I was thinking the same. Depressing, but amazing.

Gonna link that on my facebook page. Maybe more people would be interested in this and will share it. Since the mass media won't do shit until they see money flying down from the sky, we have to inform more people.
 

lacktheknack

Je suis joined jewels.
Jan 19, 2009
19,316
0
0
Puzzlenaut said:
A mitochondrion isn't a type of cell, its just a membrane with a few ribosomes in it and the apparatus required to make the cell's energy.

I'm really failing to see how this could fight cancer.

The quote in the OP was written like it was aimed at a two year old and I can't make heads nor tails of it.

Strikes me as BS tbh...
The Mitochondria has the ability to kill the cell, if I remember my biology correctly, and cancer cells have mitochondria that don't kill the cell after a certain amount of time. Thus, you have a buildup of cancer cells, or tumor.

The idea is that this drug kicks the mitochondria into action, and the tumor commits suicide.

Does it? <link=http://www.dca.med.ualberta.ca/Home/Updates/2010-05-12_Update.cfm>You tell me.
 

PatSilverFox

New member
Apr 2, 2011
498
0
0
We are a capitalist society, if you can't make money from it, why bother?
Same with space, there is no payback at the moment.
 

Trolldor

New member
Jan 20, 2011
1,849
0
0
People, seriously, do some fact-checking.

Use your head.

Do you honestly think a cure for cancer would just be ignored for several years?
I mean, really, think about it very carefully...
 

Pearwood

New member
Mar 24, 2010
1,929
0
0
This is about as scientific as homeopathic medicine. These people don't even know what a mitochondrion is, a GCSE student can tell you that.
 

AugustFall

New member
May 5, 2009
1,110
0
0
Oh my shit. The mitochondria creates ATP within cells. It has nothing to do with destroying cells.

Edit: Okay, actually. Shitty blog post is shitty. What their saying is instead of shutting down glycolysis in the cell which breaks down suger and is pretty much the start of cell respiration. They've tried to stop the kreb cycle and the electron transport chain which take place within the mitochondria. Which are much bigger players in cell respiration when it comes to ATP output. This would really slow down a cell.
 

LCP

New member
Dec 24, 2008
683
0
0
If it's done on rats then finding a terminally ill patient willing to try it shouldn't be that hard...
 

House_Vet

New member
Dec 27, 2009
247
0
0
AugustFall said:
Oh my shit. The mitochondria creates ATP within cells. It has nothing to do with destroying cells.
Sapient Pearwood said:
This is about as scientific as homeopathic medicine. These people don't even know what a mitochondrion is, a GCSE student can tell you that.
Trolldor said:
People, seriously, do some fact-checking.

Use your head.

Do you honestly think a cure for cancer would just be ignored for several years?
I mean, really, think about it very carefully...
@AugustFall: Ok, seriously man, your knowledge of Biology is severely lacking here. Read wikipedia on apoptosis or just my earlier posts.

@Sapient Pearwood: True on the OP, but if you have access the read the actual paper (or at least the abstract) on PubMed. Very different story - good science, well peer reviewed.

@Trolldor: We meet again... still can't tell what your angle is here... do you mean that there's no way it can work because we haven't heard about it previously? Or that there's no way it hasn't been being worked on? The latter's correct, but unless you get a subscription to an oncology journal there's no way you can argue the former.
 
Jan 27, 2011
3,740
0
0
Say....!@#$ing...WHAAAAAT?

....If this is true...If the only reason that this is not being worked on more is because "we can't rip people off with it"...


If this is the truth, we need to shout this from the rooftops. There are people out there dying from cancer. They need this cure, pharmaceutical wallets be damned.

Also, props to my fellow Canadians for figuring this out! :D

(I didn't read anything past the first page. I don't have the time, so if someone proved this wrong, oops)
 

House_Vet

New member
Dec 27, 2009
247
0
0
LCP said:
If it's done on rats then finding a terminally ill patient willing to try it shouldn't be that hard...
They still have to pass all the stages of trials first. Otherwise VERY illegal.
 

Ranorak

Tamer of the Coffee mug!
Feb 17, 2010
1,946
0
41
Owyn_Merrilin said:
Okay, my BS monitors are going off here. Mitochondria are a structure within the cell, not a type of cell. Further, they're essentially the powerplant of the cell; if cancer patients had non-functioning mitochondria, they'd be dead long before the cancer did anything. I'm going to have to see a more reliable source on this before I believe anything.
Actually, one of the many reason cancer cells survive the natural apoptosis progress normal cells inflict upon themselves, is because this mechanism is disabled in cancer cells. This progress is triggered in the mitochondria.

Sorry if this has already been pointed out to you, but I wasn't able to read the whole thread.
 

House_Vet

New member
Dec 27, 2009
247
0
0
aegix drakan said:
(snip)
(I didn't read anything past the first page. I don't have the time, so if someone proved this wrong, oops)
See my posts above. Also, don't believe the naysayers - they haven't actually read the paper. I have =)
 

afaceforradio

New member
Jul 29, 2009
738
0
0
In the original article it says 'the human body has... cancer fighting cell ... the mitochondria'.

These caps aren't aimed at the OP, but the article author: MITOCHONDRIA ARE NOT CELLS. They are contained WITHIN a cell and all they do is give the cell the energy to do what it needs to do. They never have been cells and cannot survive outside of a cell. They do nothing more than process oxygen in order to provide energy. It's how we breathe, move, eat, sleep and do anything. They are basically the cell battery.

This article is kinda bull. Cancer is our own cells, nothing more and nothing less. It doesn't matter which cells actually divide out of control and make us ill; it could be anything. It's not an illness, it's a biological flaw within the people that get it, and it causes illness. All it is in layman terms is your cells dividing, but getting it wrong.

This article actually reminds me of those stupid articles that claim eating healthily and drinking so much water a day can cure or prevent a type of Cancer.

Rant over.
 

Pearwood

New member
Mar 24, 2010
1,929
0
0
House_Vet said:
@Sapient Pearwood: True on the OP, but if you have access the read the actual paper (or at least the abstract) on PubMed. Very different story - good science, well peer reviewed.
I don't I'm afraid, my uni only has very limited access to PubMed papers. Is it talking about a potential cure or something that's actually been used?