Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Evidence Grows That Cancer Has Its Own Stem Cells
US News HealthDay ^ | August 1, 2012 | Lisa Esposito

Posted on 08/01/2012 1:45:54 PM PDT by Olog-hai

While scientists hotly debate the existence of cancer stem cells, three related new studies, all conducted on mice, provide some supporting evidence.

Stem cells are the foundation for healthy cell growth in the body. Some researchers believe that malignant stem cells also exist—so-called cancer stem cells that generate tumors and resist treatment by simply re-growing afterward.

"Cancer stem cells are still controversial, but with progress in studies like these, it's less about whether they exist and more about 'what does this mean?'" said Dr. Max Wicha, director of the University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, who is familiar with the new findings. …

(Excerpt) Read more at health.usnews.com ...


TOPICS: Health/Medicine; Miscellaneous; Science; Society
KEYWORDS: adultstemcells; cancer; cancerstemcells; fetalstemcells; helixmakemineadouble; medicine; molecularbiotech; stemcells

1 posted on 08/01/2012 1:46:03 PM PDT by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
In my opinion.... There may be stem cells associated with 'cancer'. This would be no surprise because 'cancer' is not a 'bug' one can eliminate.

Cells are created, and die, all the time. As long as More live than die, we are good.

When it's the other way around, it's a tumor. If the die-off spreads to other areas, it is malignant.

Since doctors seem to label CANCER as a CONDITION (correct me if I'm wrong), then we know the condition doesn't have stem cells. The stem cells may belong to the dying/dead cells that the 'condition' has overtaken.

What causes the 'condition'? I.E. What causes the cells to suddenly expire ?

Even they say they don't know.

2 posted on 08/01/2012 2:07:57 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (Help. How do I put something in my tagline.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

“What causes the ‘condition’? I.E. What causes the cells to suddenly expire ?

Even they say they don’t know.”


You should take a look at this TEDtalk:

http://www.ted.com/talks/mina_bissell_experiments_that_point_to_a_new_understanding_of_cancer.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TEDTalks_video+%28TEDTalks+Main+%28SD%29+-+Site%29


3 posted on 08/01/2012 2:26:08 PM PDT by RatSlayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RatSlayer

Thank you for the link.


4 posted on 08/02/2012 1:16:24 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (Help. How do I put something in my tagline.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2; neverdem; decimon
This is a very exciting breakthrough. While treatments may still be years away, this points to the potential methods of early identification (including in healthy people with family history and/or genetic predisposition to certain kinds of cancer) and possible early treatments and/or prevention of cancers through eradication, deactivation or replacement of the malignant stem cells. Also, the chances of regrowth after the now-considered successful therapy may be more predictable through analysis of the potentially remaining malignant stem cells.

The delivery mechanism of the drugs may now be affected to include not only where (locale) the "smart drugs" need to go to minimize the damage to healthy tissues, but also looking for and exterminating the cancer stem cells, which until now were masked as "healthy" tissues, leading to substantially decreasing chances for cancer regrowth, i.e., effectively achieving "permanent" remission.

More material on this:

Cancer stem cell discovery could signal 'paradigm shift' - BBC News, by Pallab Ghosh, 2012 August 01

Stem cell findings point toward new cancer treatments - LAT, by Rosie Mestel and Eryn Brown, 2012 August 01

This breakthrough and the advances in targeted drug delivery mechanisms, including new targeted genetic cells modification mechanisms may soon give hope of effective "permanent" treatment to millions of people suffering from cancers.

5 posted on 08/02/2012 6:23:16 PM PDT by CutePuppy (If you don't ask the right questions you may not get the right answers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy; Coleus; Peach; airborne; Asphalt; Dr. Scarpetta; I'm ALL Right!; StAnDeliver; ovrtaxt; ..
Cancer stem cells tracked

FReepmail me if you want on or off my stem cell ping list.

Scroll down to the references if you want to read the linked abstracts.

6 posted on 08/02/2012 11:39:30 PM PDT by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RatSlayer; UCANSEE2

Here’s another article about the same subject:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/29/health/research/29cancer.html?pagewanted=all


7 posted on 08/04/2012 4:15:48 AM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy; neverdem; decimon

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/29/health/research/29cancer.html?pagewanted=all

From the above article:

“The people who are successful become vested in their ideas,” Dr. Bissell said. “It becomes extraordinarily difficult for new ideas to find their way.”

Our current medical development model, even before Obamacare, is extremely socialistic. A narrow elite can block or control or limit research as well as implementation. If American medicine is to continue to thrive Obamacare must not only be turned back, but the entire system brought into accord with economic liberty.

We’ll leave the West behind - without any apologies to the Beatles.


8 posted on 08/04/2012 4:19:25 AM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; ...

Thanks Olog-hai and neverdem.


9 posted on 08/04/2012 6:28:15 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 1010RD; All
“The people who are successful become vested in their ideas,” Dr. Bissell said. “It becomes extraordinarily difficult for new ideas to find their way.”

The inertia, entrenched vested special interests and inevitable corruption are the natural legacies of bad ideas from politicians, governments and bureaucracy.

The "celebration" of the NHS at the London Olympics' opening ceremony and the fawning coverage of it by the American media reporters ("... and it's free!") were - for those familiar with the system's gross deficiencies and failures, such as chronic lack of timely resources and services - grotesque.

Our current medical development model, even before Obamacare, is extremely socialistic. A narrow elite can block or control or limit research as well as implementation. If American medicine is to continue to thrive Obamacare must not only be turned back, but the entire system brought into accord with economic liberty.

Similar points and the need for A Supply-Side Solution for Health Care - (B, 2012 June 21) were made recently by H. Woody Brock, president and founder of Strategic Economic Decisions, while he made a strong effort to be diplomatically kind to "both sides" of the debate:


10 posted on 08/05/2012 4:51:13 AM PDT by CutePuppy (If you don't ask the right questions you may not get the right answers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy

And the supply-side is the most easily expanded. Reduced licensing requirements, allow cross state medical licensing, allow Walmart, Walgreens, Costco, etc. to work their market magic and you’ll see healthcare costs plummet.

What the GOP has failed to do is recognize the supply side solutions. Why not have a national medical license that allows labor to move to where the need is? Why not simplify the FDA pharmaceutical rules and allow European approved drugs in America? Why not allow terminal patients to try any experimental drug they can? It’s just plain stupid when the solutions are right before your eyes.

More supply means lower prices. Yet, the GOP simply asks people to pay more. When has any company used the “pay more for the same” strategy and succeeded? Why would anyone think that will work for politics?

The Dems know that “if it’s free it’s for me” and use it to their advantage. We know that supply side economics works, but instead we approach medical care like Keynesians (although, Keynes must be turning over in his grave over how his opinions and theories are being abused today).


11 posted on 08/05/2012 5:12:54 AM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD; CutePuppy
And the supply-side is the most easily expanded.

The problem is the quality of new doctors. IMHO, you don't want just anybody making life and death decisions. I don't have a problem with expanding the number of nurse practicioners and physician assistants working under the supervision of docs.

12 posted on 08/05/2012 2:31:24 PM PDT by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

Comment #13 Removed by Moderator

To: 1010RD; neverdem
Walgreens, CVS and few others (soon surely to be followed by Walmart and Costco etc.) are starting to set up the in-store "medical stations" where licensed RNs, for a reasonable price, may offer some medical services and referrals not requiring doctors license.

Costco has in-store Vision Centers for "budget" eye/vision exams and lenses prescriptions, if needed.

That's private enterprise providing solutions and fulfilling at least some of the unmet need, no thanks to the government, in fact, very limited due to the government regulations. But these are really a small-scale, "fill-in the gap" solutions instead of full-scale, "normal" convenience and budget policy options encouraged and made easier by the public policies.

What the GOP has failed to do is recognize the supply side solutions. ... Why not simplify the FDA pharmaceutical rules and allow European approved drugs in America? Why not allow terminal patients to try any experimental drug they can?

All excellent suggestions. In fact, Newt Gingrich from 1995 has battled the FDA for much faster approval of drugs and relaxed requirements for testing and the use of "experimental" drugs for "untreatable" diseases and "off-label" drugs that had similar chemical composition and/or clinical effects to approved drugs.

Unfortunately, the GOP - with the exception of leaders like Reagan and Gingrich - is not a supply-side party, Bush-Romney "establishment wing" of the party is very comfortable with "government knows best" and the top-down approach, as long as they, the "enlightened" Republicans, are in charge.

More supply means lower prices. Yet, the GOP simply asks people to pay more.

They don't call it Stupid Party for nothing. Simple example I use is that stores sell more when items are "on sale" (JCPenny's botched no-"sales" strategy is the case in point). People easily understand that more products at lower prices is a better deal for them because they live it every day.

Republican "leaders" (with the notable exception of Reagan and Gingrich) are somehow incapable of articulating the benefits and defending the "goodness" of capitalism to "regular folks". Romney may "not apologize for his success" but he doesn't give anyone else the impression that capitalism is good for them, or the confidence that it works better for every "class," including the "poor," as opposed to liberal “if it's free it's for me” message that is very simple and very seductive.

Maybe it's because the Republican establishment and the GOP "leaders" don't really believe in free-market capitalism and (to quote George H.w. Bush, "voodoo") supply-side economics themselves and only pay it a lip service to keep getting elected.

Charles Murray wrote an excellent article about these exact problems with GOP's message (or lack of it) and, more specifically, inability of conservatives to articulate the message of capitalism:

From Why Capitalism Has an Image Problem - WSJ, by Charles Murray, 2012 July 27

We know that supply side economics works, but instead we approach medical care like Keynesians (although, Keynes must be turning over in his grave over how his opinions and theories are being abused today).

Keynes was a believer in and advocate of government fiscal "intervention" in times of economic distress but not of the top-down control of economy and industries, or effective takeover and/or "nationalization" or "socialization" of the industries and the economy.

Very good article on philosophic differences between Milton Friedman and John Maynard Keynes (with a touch of Hayek and the intellectual dishonesty by Paul Krugman thrown in) by Donald Boudreaux, professor of economics at George Mason University and author of "Hypocrites and Half-Wits":

Donald Boudreaux: Was Milton Friedman a Secret Admirer of Keynes? - WSJ, by Donald Boudreaux, 2012 August 03

14 posted on 08/05/2012 2:55:40 PM PDT by CutePuppy (If you don't ask the right questions you may not get the right answers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: CutePuppy
I recently heard the radiology ‘community’ are not all that pleased they are required so many years of training, certification to ‘read’ x-rays and yet the TSA is ordered with minimal training to x-ray anybody/everybody getting on an airplane.

I figure it won't be long these TSA agents will have put in the hours to be qualified to replace high priced radiologists....

15 posted on 08/05/2012 3:00:51 PM PDT by Just mythoughts (Luke 17:32 Remember Lot's wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts
...certification to ‘read’ x-rays and yet the TSA...

These "X-rays" do require different "reading" levels, but a cute juxtaposition nonetheless. And with a little bit of training nothing is impossible. :-)

16 posted on 08/05/2012 3:22:33 PM PDT by CutePuppy (If you don't ask the right questions you may not get the right answers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson