Live data from Hacker News

Ultrasound destroys 80 percent of prostate cancers in one-year study

newatlas.com

111–120 of 125 posts

Re: Ultrasound destroys 80 percent of prostate cancers in one-year study

#111

This is good video[0] explaining how it works. Chosen resonating waves may destroy bridges, not to mention some cell membrane. The problem is there is no money in that for big pharma & co. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1w0_kazbb_U

There's no money for laser eye surgery in big pharma, but it seems to be going OK.

Re: Ultrasound destroys 80 percent of prostate cancers in one-year study

#112
post #34

As someone whose family member recently just received a test showing elevated PSA levels (Prostate Cancer indicator); this article is a very real blessing. # Baseline issues with prostate cancer that suck. 1. Don't treat a benign version and possibly live with trouble urinating and follow on problems from that. 2. Don't treat a malignant version and die 3. Treat it and potentially be impotent 4. Treat it and end up w…

I skimmed all the comments, and am surprised that nobody mentioned the recent advances in radiation treatments. The cancer is modeled with MRI images, dots are tattooed on the patient's body and used to line up the patient with projected laser dots to ensure that body is in exactly the right position, and three trackers are placed into the prostate (Calypso) which allow real time tracking of prostate position. Radiation beams are targeted directly at the cancer, causing minimum damage to the surrounding tissue. The treatment takes about 15 minutes once a day for 30 days. The doctors say it has few side effects and is vastly preferable to surgery. The nurse said this procedure has been available for about 5 years.

Re: Ultrasound destroys 80 percent of prostate cancers in one-year study

#113
post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some trans women have prostates? TIL. I honestly didn't know. But you're right that I completely forgot about the intersex group. In fact, I initially wondered if homosexual couples (of either sex) could refer to their SO as "wife", but then the comments also use "she", so I kinda dismissed the possibility of a biologically male "wife".

Yes, some trans women have prostates. In 2019, even if you have a penis and balls, you can identify as a woman for the day and be considered 'trans'. I'm glad people are starting to respect pronouns, so I can be called by my proper pronoun: "gigantic cock".

If you keep posting flamebait to HN we're going to have to ban you, so please stop.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Ultrasound destroys 80 percent of prostate cancers in one-year study

#114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MRI is probably the major technical cost. It's fairly high touch and the magnets wear out, so the capital cost of each test is fairly real. That and the professional component. Interventional radiologists are very much in the consultant/handyman/engineer business of "Treatment: $1; knowing where to put it: $9999"

In Japan an you can get an MRI for $160 US I hear

Medical treatment in Japan is mostly paid for by the government with the individual co-pay being 30-0% depending on the procedure.

The cost to the patient =! the actual cost of the procedure.

I would pay £0 for spending the night in the hospital even tho the cost of the trauma bed alone is £3200 per night according to NHS England.

Re: Ultrasound destroys 80 percent of prostate cancers in one-year study

#115
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By the way, your family member is probably aware of this but there is another ultrasound treatment option for prostate cancer that is completely non-invasive. It is called hifu. https://www.hifu-prostate.com/ Hifu sends ultrasound from a curved emitter from outside the body in such a manner that the ultrasound ray will be focused on the treatment area. Thus, while you have ultrasound going through your body, only in…

Definitely agree that you should look into HIFU. HIFU is "competing" with transurethral focused ultrasound (TUS). HIFU works, but has its limitations. Given that it's transrectal, it will not be able to deposit ultrasound energy only into the prostate; the rectum gets hit too. Furthermore, there's no temperature feedback during the procedure; the doctor will send ultrasound energy to the target area and use ultrasoun…

The damage to the rectum isn't much as it's outside the focal point of the ultrasound. The main ablation happens at the point where the ultrasound is focused.

Re: Ultrasound destroys 80 percent of prostate cancers in one-year study

#116
post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, some trans women have prostates. In 2019, even if you have a penis and balls, you can identify as a woman for the day and be considered 'trans'. I'm glad people are starting to respect pronouns, so I can be called by my proper pronoun: "gigantic cock".

If you keep posting flamebait to HN we're going to have to ban you, so please stop. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

It's not flaimbait. I'm posting the truth. I'm sorry if the truth hurts and you are offended by my personal pronouns.

Re: Ultrasound destroys 80 percent of prostate cancers in one-year study

#117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Japan an you can get an MRI for $160 US I hear

Medical treatment in Japan is mostly paid for by the government with the individual co-pay being 30-0% depending on the procedure. The cost to the patient =! the actual cost of the procedure. I would pay £0 for spending the night in the hospital even tho the cost of the trauma bed alone is £3200 per night according to NHS England.

It’s not paid by the government, it’s paid by the health insurance system that everyone must enroll in and had to pay for every trimester. Granted, it’s not too expensive.

Re: Ultrasound destroys 80 percent of prostate cancers in one-year study

#118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe it is using heat (from ultrasound oscillation) to burn them. Cells can't survive the heat.

Yes, I realize that's the intention. My concern is whether ultrasound might unintentionally break up the tumour and release cancerous cells to spread throughout the body.

I am not a doctor nor an expert in this area, but I would presume that would be a valid risk if the frequency were not tuned specifically to resonate the tumor prior to increasing the amplitude. And then there is the matter of focus / accuracy. Perhaps nih.gov has a study with numbers to show the attainable accuracy and what statistics are given back to the equipment and the doctor to compensate and tune the signal. My understanding is that the inverse is generally true, in that, there is too much heat and the surrounding area is scarred.

Re: Ultrasound destroys 80 percent of prostate cancers in one-year study

#119
post #112
post #34

As someone whose family member recently just received a test showing elevated PSA levels (Prostate Cancer indicator); this article is a very real blessing. # Baseline issues with prostate cancer that suck. 1. Don't treat a benign version and possibly live with trouble urinating and follow on problems from that. 2. Don't treat a malignant version and die 3. Treat it and potentially be impotent 4. Treat it and end up w…

I skimmed all the comments, and am surprised that nobody mentioned the recent advances in radiation treatments. The cancer is modeled with MRI images, dots are tattooed on the patient's body and used to line up the patient with projected laser dots to ensure that body is in exactly the right position, and three trackers are placed into the prostate (Calypso) which allow real time tracking of prostate position. Radiat…

My step dad designed the hardware that does the tracking. Had to do some pretty cool stuff to treat the microprocessors because of all the radiation ...

Re: Ultrasound destroys 80 percent of prostate cancers in one-year study

#120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And then of course in this huge wild planet of ours there's people who get a kick out of doing that for fun.

So, I clear international freight through customs for a living. Maybe a decade ago we had this shipment from a now defunct website that was (I think, maybe it had the c) 'fuk.it'. In the package were various 'sexual toys'. Some sort of electronic shock device, some comically large anal 'toy' and a 'deep hole dick spreader' which was a urethral sound being marketed as a sex 'toy'. We had to go to the website to try an…

I'm both disgusted and amused by this. Thank you for sharing. I love hearing stories like these on HN, random windows into the lives of people on HN.
Post reply on HN