Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Temozolomide Is Explosive

blogs.sciencemag.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 128 posts

Re: Temozolomide Is Explosive

#51

Post by gus_massa »

azinman2 wrote: post #6

Chemotherapy is basically cave man medicine. That a therapeutic drug is explosive only adds to that sentiment. The idea that we'll basically poison you just up to a point that's nearly fatal in order to kill the cancer is such a terrible way to treat someone. Now I'm not saying don't ever do it -- unfortunately that's where we're at in 2021. It's just kind of unbelievable that cancer remains so elusive that we're sti…

> That a therapeutic drug is explosive only adds to that sentiment.

Explosivity and toxicity are unrelated. Cyanide can kill you, but it's not explosive IIRC. You can make explosives with aluminum, but it's safe to use as a food container, ...

> Chemotherapy is basically cave man medicine.

The main problem is that cancer cells and normal cells are very similar. Anything that kills cancer cells will probably kill normal cells. Anything that is safe for normal cells is probably safe for cancer cells. Killing one but not the other is like a poll trickshot.

(Killing bacteria or fungus is easier, because some of the molecules they use are different, and sometimes they produce the molecules using a different method, so you can make a drug that attack the difference and hope the best.)

Also, not all the treatment for cancer use chemotherapy methods. Some cancers are affected by hormones, so you can modify the hormone levels. (This also cause problems in the part of you body that use the hormone, so it's a tradeoff.)

Re: Temozolomide Is Explosive

#53

Post by Arrath »

tyingq wrote: post #35

Maybe helpful to note that the phrase "Class 1 Explosive" isn't denoting a certain type, or power of "Explosive". "Class 1" in Hazmat is all explosives. Class 2 is Gases. Class 3 is Flammable or Combustible liquid, and so on.

Fair point. The sub-classification gets into those weeds.

For example:

1.1 being "mass explosion hazard", typically high-explosives. 1.4 being "fire or projection hazard", typically consumer fireworks, small arms ammunition. 1.5 is "may mass explode in fire", things like AN fertilizer (Beirut; West, Texas), many industrial blasting agents.

Re: Temozolomide Is Explosive

#54

Post by cratermoon »

throwawayboise wrote: post #43
laurent92 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At every people’s house, I see a cupboard with the chemicals. WD-40, 90° alcohol, acetone, white spirit, all in the same IKEA (=plywood) cupboard (although it would be hard to protect children if they were each in a different cupboard too). I wonder how many fires start from the chemicals cupboard. We know that a lot of artists had their rag pile spontaneously heating up then catching fire…

Those things are fine in their separate containers. They will not spontaneously combust. If the containers are leaking, or fire starts elsewhere, yeah they could become fuel. But really no more than any other hydrocarbons in your house (e.g. wood, plastic, cloth, upholstrey and foam cushions, etc.)

In case of fire, does it matter that they are all in one cabinet together? Should they be stored separately so that a fire that does reach one won't cause a serious acceleration through combinations?

Re: Temozolomide Is Explosive

#55

Post by josefx »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #45
azinman2 wrote: post #6

Chemotherapy is basically cave man medicine. That a therapeutic drug is explosive only adds to that sentiment. The idea that we'll basically poison you just up to a point that's nearly fatal in order to kill the cancer is such a terrible way to treat someone. Now I'm not saying don't ever do it -- unfortunately that's where we're at in 2021. It's just kind of unbelievable that cancer remains so elusive that we're sti…

>Perhaps one day we'll be able to simulate the body well enough to the point where we can brute force treatments computationally to fix this gap. This is why as a total outsider/non-expert I believe we will cure everything in the next 50 years if we do not regress or destroy ourselves.

Remember how Steve Jobs suicided on fruitarianism instead of getting his cancer treated when it was found in its early stages? The biggest tech company on the planet was basically led by an anti science lunatic with millions of followers.

We will probably end up almost destroying our selves twice over before we get anywhere near curing every disease. On the plus side wiping out almost all of humanity should also take care of dozens of illnesses.

Re: Temozolomide Is Explosive

#56

Post by cratermoon »

dylan604 wrote: post #7

"What they found was rapid onset of decomposition at 170 degrees" So this seems to be more about people in a lab situation rather than it being so unstable it reacting sitting in someone's hot car. Suspecting it to react at 212 and finding it reacting at 170 could ruin a lab tech's day to be sure. Those are the jobs that sound fun "for the science" lets see what happens when...

Something about that part of the article had me wondering. It seems they ran some sophisticated tests to determine the physical properties which would lead to it decomposing, but they didn't actually put a sample of the stuff on a source in a vent hood? It does say they later ran some standard tests for explosivity on it, I suppose that counts?

Re: Temozolomide Is Explosive

#57

Post by cratermoon »

ISL wrote: post #17
munificent wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're overlooking the most important scenario: mass production of it in a factory setting.

And just handling/storage. Things that are flammable or explosive have more-stringent requirements. A familiar example: one should take much greater care when storing rubbing alcohol (or Bacardi 151 or vodka) than wine. One will magnify a house-fire. The other will help to douse a flame.

See, for example, Beirut.

Re: Temozolomide Is Explosive

#58

Post by zaroth »

open-source-ux wrote: post #49
azinman2 wrote: post #6

Chemotherapy is basically cave man medicine. That a therapeutic drug is explosive only adds to that sentiment. The idea that we'll basically poison you just up to a point that's nearly fatal in order to kill the cancer is such a terrible way to treat someone. Now I'm not saying don't ever do it -- unfortunately that's where we're at in 2021. It's just kind of unbelievable that cancer remains so elusive that we're sti…

My understanding is that chemotherapy is indiscrimate when it attacks cells - it affects cancerous and healthy cells alike. However, doctors assume the healthy cells will recover from the weakening effects of chemotherapy. Meanwhile the cancer cells are stressed to a greater degree by the chemotherapy and thus suspectible to death. All this is presented as the "best outcome" scenario for chemotherapy treament. Howeve…

Not entirely indiscriminate. For example as I understand it, a lot of chemo drugs attack cells that divide quickly. Which is why a lot of times hair loss is a side effect because they are some of the faster dividing cells in the body.

Re: Temozolomide Is Explosive

#59

Post by MisterTea »

tyingq wrote: post #35

Maybe helpful to note that the phrase "Class 1 Explosive" isn't denoting a certain type, or power of "Explosive". "Class 1" in Hazmat is all explosives. Class 2 is Gases. Class 3 is Flammable or Combustible liquid, and so on.

Are you referring to the NFPA diamond? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFPA_704

The explosive class mentioned is likely using a different scale or standard.

Re: Temozolomide Is Explosive

#60

Post by et2o »

robbiep wrote: post #15
azinman2 wrote: post #6

Chemotherapy is basically cave man medicine. That a therapeutic drug is explosive only adds to that sentiment. The idea that we'll basically poison you just up to a point that's nearly fatal in order to kill the cancer is such a terrible way to treat someone. Now I'm not saying don't ever do it -- unfortunately that's where we're at in 2021. It's just kind of unbelievable that cancer remains so elusive that we're sti…

The cancers that are treated successfully in children are the blood borne ones (mostly leukemias) and generally because they’re easier to wipe out and replace the marrow with. Some Childhood brain tumours are also very successfully treated, and most other adult cancers children don’t get. Sarcomas still kill people left right and centre though. The truth is that we’re already peeking out of the dark ages of chemother…

Metastatic melanoma? I haven’t seen any data showing close to 50% survival rate, where are you looking? Just managed a young patient with metastatic melanoma and very poor prognosis.
Post reply on HN