was bored and watching bad cable the other night ... yea, i know, should have been listening to music instead of watching tv, lol ... but anyway i saw this show where this really old guy claimed he had found a new treatment for cancer ... possibly a revolutionary breakthrough on the disease.
the basic idea was that metallic particles are injected into a tumor, either directly via needle or through drugs/chemicals that cause the tumor cells to uptake the metal injected into the blood stream. then a high power RF amplifier is used to send an intense, concentrated RF signal directly through the body in the vicinity of the tumor. the RF then excites the metal particles that are now inside the tumor cells, causing them (the metal in the tumor cells) to heat up while leaving the nearby good cells (with no metal in them) unaffected. this in turn kills the tumor with heat, while minimizing or eliminating altogether the collateral damage to nearby healthy (good) cells caused by conventional treatments, such as chemotherapy or radiotherapy. this is in theory, of course, but several experts in cancer research said this was the most promising treatment idea they had seen in years, perhaps even decades.
i'm no biologist and certainly no doctor, but from an engineering/tech point of view this kinda made some sense, at least from a physics standpoint. thoughts?
the basic idea was that metallic particles are injected into a tumor, either directly via needle or through drugs/chemicals that cause the tumor cells to uptake the metal injected into the blood stream. then a high power RF amplifier is used to send an intense, concentrated RF signal directly through the body in the vicinity of the tumor. the RF then excites the metal particles that are now inside the tumor cells, causing them (the metal in the tumor cells) to heat up while leaving the nearby good cells (with no metal in them) unaffected. this in turn kills the tumor with heat, while minimizing or eliminating altogether the collateral damage to nearby healthy (good) cells caused by conventional treatments, such as chemotherapy or radiotherapy. this is in theory, of course, but several experts in cancer research said this was the most promising treatment idea they had seen in years, perhaps even decades.
i'm no biologist and certainly no doctor, but from an engineering/tech point of view this kinda made some sense, at least from a physics standpoint. thoughts?
In Sweden, where I live,
there is an ongoing debate with different guessings
that Mobile Phones can cause cancer in brain - close to ear.
Especially they warn youngsters and children
from using mobile phone with high UHF radiation values.
Because the brain tissue in child is not fully developed and grown
they are said to be more sensitive to high dosis of UHF radiation waves.
There are some few research being done.
Still only ideas.
Like everything new, man will expose himself or animals or plants to,
the true effects may become clear and known later.
Many years later.
We know this from medicine bieffects (Neurosodyne) and we know this from Asbestus use
and we know this from the long term consequencies of The US Hiroshima & Nagasaki nuclear bombings.
Lineup
there is an ongoing debate with different guessings
that Mobile Phones can cause cancer in brain - close to ear.
Especially they warn youngsters and children
from using mobile phone with high UHF radiation values.
Because the brain tissue in child is not fully developed and grown
they are said to be more sensitive to high dosis of UHF radiation waves.
There are some few research being done.
Still only ideas.
Like everything new, man will expose himself or animals or plants to,
the true effects may become clear and known later.
Many years later.
We know this from medicine bieffects (Neurosodyne) and we know this from Asbestus use
and we know this from the long term consequencies of The US Hiroshima & Nagasaki nuclear bombings.
Lineup
....and not a single documented "cure" by any of them. This whole argument is silly conspiracy theory nonsense that borders on political/religious speech.
Big Pharma is eager to take and commercialize any "natural cure" that actually works. Many times the base compound has nasty side effects that slight modifications can help minimize.
Red yeast rice --> statin drugs
opium ---> many pain killers
willow bark --->aspirin
there are thousands of such examples.
It's a variation on hyperthermia treatment, which never proved to work very well. If you get tissue hot enough to kill the tumor, for one thing it is limited by how much pain the patient can tolerate. Also with heating, blood profusion increases and carries away more heat faster, and possibly more metal particles carried away faster. Makes it difficult to heat only the exact area you want, and avoid treating the surrounding area.
There's a lot of factors that you'd want to understand about cancer biology--but, namely, cancerous cells are nominally more permeable (read: leaky) and far more metabolically active (more likely to uptake nutrients/etc). That said, I don't want to convey that I'm much of an expert, just a bit more experienced than the average Joe.
Lots of very interesting work going on here. I'm lucky to be peripheral to a lot of nanoparticle drug delivery (and energy focusing modalities, e.g. ultrasound, RF, optical, nuclear) even though my primary research is/was in diagnostic platforms. As Mark alludes, it's hard to really cook an area well over time, so being able to get a very large dose into an area in a very short period of time is definitely a goal.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.