Inventor may have breakthrough in killing cancer cells

wkyc.com ^ | :8/22/2007 | Michael O'Mara

[EGPWS]

A guy that names his machine with his own name, uses RF rays and also comments how the evil corporatists would take his research and hide it to kill people for profit just seems like another sad case of tin foil head.

He just hasn't learned as of yet the impact that late night "infomercials" could have on his promotion.

[Boiling point]

A similar discovery was made at Vanderbilt University using their free electron laser project. Basically it is a low dose focused X-ray laser. It has destroyed cancer cells in lab animals without the knife. The problem is that it is doubtful it will ever be approved by the FDA for such purpose as there is big money in TREATING cancer. Not curing it.

[farlander]

Let’s just say, any of these technologies, if they worked, and commercialized, would be worth trillions of dollars.

No ‘evil capitalist’ in their right mind would ever not bring them to market intentionally.

[LdSentinal]

I’m sorry for your loss.

[stefanbatory]

he kinda looks like an extra from the original Star Trek...

[farlander]

C’mon. Think about it. These therapies are all fine and dandy in the lab, but an actual ‘cure’ is something completely different. And, ‘cancer’, is not a single disease, on the contrary, ‘cancer’ is a word for a family of *completely* differently behaving diseases. The underlying premise is the same, cells replicating erroneously without end, but different cells have different mechanisms that go wrong producing a completely different effect and disease behaviour. Hence some cancers are very suitable to existing treatment, and others are a 3 week death sentence.

As I said earlier, curing *any* form of cancer, especially any of the common ones, would be *far* more profitable then current ‘treatment’.

How much would you pay for the cure ? 50k ? 100k ? Everything you had ? How much would you pay for something that may or, most likely, won’t work ?

[Dr. Scarpetta]

Bump

[farlander]

ROFL.

Get the Kanzius RF to cure your cancer for just $29.99! And, if you call now, we’ll throw in this surgical knife and mirror in case it doesn’t work for free!

[EGPWS]

Get the Kanzius RF to cure your cancer for just $29.99! And, if you call now, we’ll throw in this surgical knife and mirror in case it doesn’t work for free!

+ Shipping & Handling...

[EGPWS]

The problem is that it is doubtful it will ever be approved by the FDA for such purpose as there is big money in TREATING cancer. Not curing it.

Tree bark...

Just convince the "save the world" crowd. LOL!

[webstersII]

“Maybe the zapped area grew a scab, who knows?”

If so that would put the kibosh on that procedure.

Pieces of arterial lesions breaking off and clogging arteries are what causes heart attacks.

[Perchant]

This is the same quack who was featured in another article here about turning salt water into fuel.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1850959/posts

[G8 Diplomat]

the Kanzius RF machine and special nanoparticles, it appears that cancer cells can be targeted and killed without harming the rest of the body.

Good, so now we can use his method of targeting the cells to put into action my method for killing the cells. Which is...

Chromosomes have telomeres on the end, to protect the DNA from getting destroyed through division. Each time the cell divides however, the telomere gets a bit shorter. The only reason it doesn't disappear completely is because of the enzyme telomerase, which helps regenerate it. In cancer cells however, cell division is taking place extremely rapidly. The telomeres of the defective DNA are getting cut shorter much quicker. Since this is DNA of the cancer cells, we don't want that DNA, we don't want malignant cells. If we could find a competitive inhibitor to the enzyme telomerase and inject it into the cancerous cells, perhaps the telomerase would stop working and would not regenerate telomeres on cancer cell chromosomes. Thus, due to rapid mitosis (cellular division), the cell would ultimately kill itself because the telomeres would disslove quicker and delete the DNA in the nucleus of the cancer cell.

[Kirkwood]

It will be a real trick to get the nanoparticles inside the cancer cells ony and not the healthy cells. If we could do that, we could just deliver chemo to kill those specific cells and skip the RF device.

In addition, any pharma company would love to have an effective cancer treatment. They would rake in money hand over fist. There is no money to be made on treatments that don’t work and the patients die.

[Kirkwood]

Ask any immunologist and they will tell you that virtually everyone who lives a long life has cancer at lesat several times, but those cancers are killed off by the natural immune system. It is the cancer that is tougher than your immune system that will likely kill you.

[shield]

This has been around for a long time. The FDA stopped it from being used in the USA...wonder why? ‘Cause it works!!!

[TChad]

Already posted.

Guess what, Republican earmarks funded this (probable) turkey.

[I slam Islam]

The only 100% certain way to destroy cancer = Put the weapon to the head and pull the trigger. I did not have to invent anything to know that.

[chuckles]

What they showed on film was the clot vaporizing inside the artery. There was no debris that I could see. I was being sarcastic when mentioning the scab.

The wavelength of the laser was supposed to attack the clot and not damage the vessel. As they moved the laser across the plaque, it appeared to have smoke or dust released. They said that was carried away to the kidneys. I always figured the reason they didn't use it here was they blew holes in the artery and had an emergency worse than before. It was supposed to be focused energy to a millimeter or 2.

[Main Street]

"In addition, any pharma company would love to have an effective cancer treatment. They would rake in money hand over fist. There is no money to be made on treatments that don’t work and the patients die."

From UPI, July 12, 2006, article 'Cancer drug pipeline on the rise', Katie Siafaca, spokeswoman for New Medicine, a Pro-Drug group, callously states the reason more and more Drug companies are entering research, not for a cure, but for cancer 'treatments'.:

"They did not go after cancer in the old days because it didn't seem like a place where you could make a lot of money," she said.

But that has changed because cancer drugs can now be very expensive, with some costing tens of thousands of dollars per patient, and many patients will receive multiple drugs during the course of their disease.

The use of second- and third-line therapies "has made chemotherapy a very big business because one patient may have three or four different treatments before they expire," Siafaca said.

In addition, a lower rate of efficacy and a higher rate of side effects can often be acceptable in this arena, particularly in advanced cancer patients with no other options. "A lot of drugs all they do is extend life by several months but you can still make money off it," she said.