Nanotechnology vs Cancer

[Delta4Embassy]

New nanodevice defeats drug resistance

" Chemotherapy often shrinks tumors at first, but as cancer cells become resistant to drug treatment, tumors can grow back. A new nanodevice developed by MIT researchers can help overcome that by first blocking the gene that confers drug resistance, then launching a new chemotherapy attack against the disarmed tumors.

The device, which consists of gold nanoparticles embedded in a hydrogel that can be injected or implanted at a tumor site, could also be used more broadly to disrupt any gene involved in cancer.

"You can target any genetic marker and deliver a drug, including those that don't necessarily involve drug-resistance pathways. It's a universal platform for dual therapy," says Natalie Artzi, a research scientist at MIT's Institute for Medical Engineering and Science (IMES), an assistant professor at Harvard Medical School, and senior author of a paper describing the device in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences the week of March 2."

more at link

While this is encouraging for cancer treatments, it also bears out a long held worry of mine: if we can target specific genes for destruction (curing) what's to prevent targetting genes typically associated with specific ethnicites? Sickle cell in blacks for example or Taysach's in Jews.

A genetic weapon seems plausible. Create a nanotech that kills only specific genes commonly found in specific ethnicities and you can wipe those ethnicities out.

 

[JQPublic1]

New nanodevice defeats drug resistance

" Chemotherapy often shrinks tumors at first, but as cancer cells become resistant to drug treatment, tumors can grow back. A new nanodevice developed by MIT researchers can help overcome that by first blocking the gene that confers drug resistance, then launching a new chemotherapy attack against the disarmed tumors.

The device, which consists of gold nanoparticles embedded in a hydrogel that can be injected or implanted at a tumor site, could also be used more broadly to disrupt any gene involved in cancer.

"You can target any genetic marker and deliver a drug, including those that don't necessarily involve drug-resistance pathways. It's a universal platform for dual therapy," says Natalie Artzi, a research scientist at MIT's Institute for Medical Engineering and Science (IMES), an assistant professor at Harvard Medical School, and senior author of a paper describing the device in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences the week of March 2."

more at link

While this is encouraging for cancer treatments, it also bears out a long held worry of mine: if we can target specific genes for destruction (curing) what's to prevent targetting genes typically associated with specific ethnicites? Sickle cell in blacks for example or Taysach's in Jews.

A genetic weapon seems plausible. Create a nanotech that kills only specific genes commonly found in specific ethnicities and you can wipe those ethnicities out.

Any news of new technology to fight cancer is good news. As you say, though, new developments can be exploited for military or nefarious purposes. Experimentation with "designer pathogens" may explain the origins of most idiopathic diseases that arise in various populations from time. to time... especially where there was no previous record of such diseases.

 

[Moonglow]

Yes, the genetic break through of how and why cancer develops is the basis for this device..Neat-huh?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

New nanodevice defeats drug resistance

" Chemotherapy often shrinks tumors at first, but as cancer cells become resistant to drug treatment, tumors can grow back. A new nanodevice developed by MIT researchers can help overcome that by first blocking the gene that confers drug resistance, then launching a new chemotherapy attack against the disarmed tumors.

The device, which consists of gold nanoparticles embedded in a hydrogel that can be injected or implanted at a tumor site, could also be used more broadly to disrupt any gene involved in cancer.

"You can target any genetic marker and deliver a drug, including those that don't necessarily involve drug-resistance pathways. It's a universal platform for dual therapy," says Natalie Artzi, a research scientist at MIT's Institute for Medical Engineering and Science (IMES), an assistant professor at Harvard Medical School, and senior author of a paper describing the device in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences the week of March 2."

more at link

While this is encouraging for cancer treatments, it also bears out a long held worry of mine: if we can target specific genes for destruction (curing) what's to prevent targetting genes typically associated with specific ethnicites? Sickle cell in blacks for example or Taysach's in Jews.

A genetic weapon seems plausible. Create a nanotech that kills only specific genes commonly found in specific ethnicities and you can wipe those ethnicities out.

Any news of new technology to fight cancer is good news. As you say, though, new developments can be exploited for military or nefarious purposes. That may explain the origins of most idiopathic diseases that arise in various populations from time. to time... especially where there was no previous record of such diseases.

Always found it very suspicious HIV showed up first in the gay population even though gay populations had existed all along. Almost like it was...Deployed into the gay population.

 

[Moonglow]

New nanodevice defeats drug resistance

" Chemotherapy often shrinks tumors at first, but as cancer cells become resistant to drug treatment, tumors can grow back. A new nanodevice developed by MIT researchers can help overcome that by first blocking the gene that confers drug resistance, then launching a new chemotherapy attack against the disarmed tumors.

The device, which consists of gold nanoparticles embedded in a hydrogel that can be injected or implanted at a tumor site, could also be used more broadly to disrupt any gene involved in cancer.

"You can target any genetic marker and deliver a drug, including those that don't necessarily involve drug-resistance pathways. It's a universal platform for dual therapy," says Natalie Artzi, a research scientist at MIT's Institute for Medical Engineering and Science (IMES), an assistant professor at Harvard Medical School, and senior author of a paper describing the device in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences the week of March 2."

more at link

While this is encouraging for cancer treatments, it also bears out a long held worry of mine: if we can target specific genes for destruction (curing) what's to prevent targetting genes typically associated with specific ethnicites? Sickle cell in blacks for example or Taysach's in Jews.

A genetic weapon seems plausible. Create a nanotech that kills only specific genes commonly found in specific ethnicities and you can wipe those ethnicities out.

Any news of new technology to fight cancer is good news. As you say, though, new developments can be exploited for military or nefarious purposes. That may explain the origins of most idiopathic diseases that arise in various populations from time. to time... especially where there was no previous record of such diseases.

Always found it very suspicious HIV showed up first in the gay population even though gay populations had existed all along. Almost like it was...Deployed into the gay population.

The straight community seems to have developed several strains of sexual diseases also....

 

[JQPublic1]

New nanodevice defeats drug resistance

" Chemotherapy often shrinks tumors at first, but as cancer cells become resistant to drug treatment, tumors can grow back. A new nanodevice developed by MIT researchers can help overcome that by first blocking the gene that confers drug resistance, then launching a new chemotherapy attack against the disarmed tumors.

The device, which consists of gold nanoparticles embedded in a hydrogel that can be injected or implanted at a tumor site, could also be used more broadly to disrupt any gene involved in cancer.

"You can target any genetic marker and deliver a drug, including those that don't necessarily involve drug-resistance pathways. It's a universal platform for dual therapy," says Natalie Artzi, a research scientist at MIT's Institute for Medical Engineering and Science (IMES), an assistant professor at Harvard Medical School, and senior author of a paper describing the device in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences the week of March 2."

more at link

While this is encouraging for cancer treatments, it also bears out a long held worry of mine: if we can target specific genes for destruction (curing) what's to prevent targetting genes typically associated with specific ethnicites? Sickle cell in blacks for example or Taysach's in Jews.

A genetic weapon seems plausible. Create a nanotech that kills only specific genes commonly found in specific ethnicities and you can wipe those ethnicities out.

Any news of new technology to fight cancer is good news. As you say, though, new developments can be exploited for military or nefarious purposes. That may explain the origins of most idiopathic diseases that arise in various populations from time. to time... especially where there was no previous record of such diseases.

Always found it very suspicious HIV showed up first in the gay population even though gay populations had existed all along. Almost like it was...Deployed into the gay population.

I think a device to attack specific "ethnic" genes would be ineffective against mixed raced individuals but may be effective in targeting genes that produce skin color or hair types of largely homogenous populations.
But if science advances enough to accomplish that, why not just change genes to make everyone look the same? I suppose from a supremacist point f view, even the minds of Black people could be changed to think and act White like good Republicans.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

New nanodevice defeats drug resistance

" Chemotherapy often shrinks tumors at first, but as cancer cells become resistant to drug treatment, tumors can grow back. A new nanodevice developed by MIT researchers can help overcome that by first blocking the gene that confers drug resistance, then launching a new chemotherapy attack against the disarmed tumors.

The device, which consists of gold nanoparticles embedded in a hydrogel that can be injected or implanted at a tumor site, could also be used more broadly to disrupt any gene involved in cancer.

"You can target any genetic marker and deliver a drug, including those that don't necessarily involve drug-resistance pathways. It's a universal platform for dual therapy," says Natalie Artzi, a research scientist at MIT's Institute for Medical Engineering and Science (IMES), an assistant professor at Harvard Medical School, and senior author of a paper describing the device in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences the week of March 2."

more at link

While this is encouraging for cancer treatments, it also bears out a long held worry of mine: if we can target specific genes for destruction (curing) what's to prevent targetting genes typically associated with specific ethnicites? Sickle cell in blacks for example or Taysach's in Jews.

A genetic weapon seems plausible. Create a nanotech that kills only specific genes commonly found in specific ethnicities and you can wipe those ethnicities out.

Any news of new technology to fight cancer is good news. As you say, though, new developments can be exploited for military or nefarious purposes. That may explain the origins of most idiopathic diseases that arise in various populations from time. to time... especially where there was no previous record of such diseases.

Always found it very suspicious HIV showed up first in the gay population even though gay populations had existed all along. Almost like it was...Deployed into the gay population.

The straight community seems to have developed several strains of sexual diseases also....

Had had STIs since ancient times like in Rome. Fact that sex diseases existed back then is why they invented condoms. What's interesting to me though is despite sexual permissiveness and promiscuity, some populations didn't have any sexual diseases whatsoever as in pre-contact Hawaii. Wasn't until European sailors showed up that diseases from sex became apparent. And while lethal diseases existed too, nothing like HIV existed or was found in just one sexual group like homosexual men.

That HIV popped up during the Christian Religious Rights' height-of-power in conservative USA is very suspicious. Until then, there was no lethal sex disease found in just one sexual demographic.

 

[JQPublic1]

hat HIV popped up during the Christian Religious Rights' height-of-power in conservative USA is very suspicious. Until then, there was no lethal sex disease found in just one sexual demographic.

That was the Reagan era. Yep, there does seem to be a strange correlation with the advent of AIDS in the gay community and the opportunity for secret experimentation cloaked by a conservative political atmosphere.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Do you also find it "odd" that the Black Plague suddenly showed up when Humans had existed all along?

"Until then, there was no lethal sex disease found in just one sexual demographic."

Except for Herpes, Hepatitis B and C and Syphylis.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Ronald Reagan Tax cuts caused AIDS!

Yep.

 

[JQPublic1]

Do you also find it "odd" that the Black Plague suddenly showed up when Humans had existed all along?

"Until then, there was no lethal sex disease found in just one sexual demographic."

Except for Herpes, Hepatitis B and C and Syphylis.

As a Christian I am predisposed to accept idiopathic diseases as God's wrath. I am also an empiricist who can accept scientific explanations that make sense. With that in mind I note the Black Plague was carried by rodents and fleas. HIV supposedly was carried by Green monkeys. The origins of BP are plausible but that of HIV is not. There were no Green Monkeys in America...except maybe in the Laboratories of Reston, Va.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Did rodents and fleas "suddenly show up" or were they there all along?

 

[JQPublic1]

Did rodents and fleas "suddenly show up" or were they there all along?

There are many varieties of rodents and fleas, I do not know if the vectors of BP were mutants or common varieties that may or may not have been more biologically suitable for the gestation of, carrying and transmitting the pathogen. There are many permutations to ponder and sort through before your question can be answered correctly. It might take a book to explain it all! Logically, though, it would seem that the fleas got the disease from the rodents but, the reverse could also be true.

 

[Mac1958]

.

Has anyone seen "Killing Cancer" on HBO?

Incredible stuff. They're having real success altering the DNA of viruses (even HIV!) to get them to attack and "explode" only cancer cells.

One doc in the show says that cancer will be beaten "in our lifetime".

I think this is the whole show: Killing Cancer A VICE on HBO Special Report

.