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

Frog-derived gut bacterium eradicates tumors in mice

thefocalpoints.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 207 posts

Re: Frog-derived gut bacterium eradicates tumors in mice

#31

Post by criddell »

aa-jv wrote: post #5

Wow, this is humorous .. whats next, the eye of the newt cures wistfulness? I sure hope so. Seriously though, we are living in an era where the more the science broadens its horizons, the more it just looks like plain ol' witchcraft. I'm hoping there'll be some uses for figs we haven't thought of, next ..

You might like this episode of Radiolab:

https://radiolab.org/podcast/best-medicine

They followed a 1100 year old medicine recipe and found the resulting salve was effective against MRSA in their test.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6261618/

Re: Frog-derived gut bacterium eradicates tumors in mice

#32

Post by drcongo »

boxed wrote: post #6
tristanj wrote: post #2

Relevant xkcd: https://xkcd.com/1217/

Not really the same in this situation though.

As in 99.9% of cases of people who rush to the comments desperate to post a link to xkcd because, erm, actually I dunno. Why the hell do half the threads on HN have someone desperately posting an unrelated xkcd?

Re: Frog-derived gut bacterium eradicates tumors in mice

#33

Post by psychoslave »

ballenf wrote: post #19

I wonder if animals have always seen frogs as unpleasant medicine they need to eat occasionally. My dog would happily scarf them down if I let him. Or does it have to be IV administered? Also who thinks -- "hmm we've found a new random bacteria --- let's give a bunch of tumors to mice and then IV inject this random thing into them!"? There must have been something about the microbe that gave them a hint. Maybe it's i…

Humans can go very far in exploring all kind of variation in whatever craze they get addicted to, all the more if they get all the room and resources to do so.

Re: Frog-derived gut bacterium eradicates tumors in mice

#35

Post by degamad »

petesergeant wrote: post #26

The blog articles (6 weeks old) describes this as new, but the linked paper is closer to 6 months old. Random report of the same bacteria giving a chemo patient sepsis: https://www.cureus.com/articles/342789-sepsis-caused-by-ewin... which seems unfortunate

Yep, I found that one too - this paper https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12710904/> assumes immunocompetent mice, while the sepsis one was in a patient who was immunocompromised (both by the cancer and by chemo).

Given that many cancer sufferers are immunocompromised, this isn't necessarily a silver bullet, although it is an interesting result.

Re: Frog-derived gut bacterium eradicates tumors in mice

#36

Post by hootz »

drcongo wrote: post #32
boxed wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really the same in this situation though.

As in 99.9% of cases of people who rush to the comments desperate to post a link to xkcd because, erm, actually I dunno. Why the hell do half the threads on HN have someone desperately posting an unrelated xkcd?

It's our Nostradamus Prophecies, just like having an old Star Trek episode for everything that is happening today.

Re: Frog-derived gut bacterium eradicates tumors in mice

#38

Post by hack1312 »

psychoslave wrote: post #34
functionmouse wrote: post #8

Mice are having a great year

Hmm, mice get much impressive medical results to be linked to here and there, but overall it’s not certain the species benefit that much in happiness and fulfilment.

They told me they’re happy enough when I was delivering them cookies.

Re: Frog-derived gut bacterium eradicates tumors in mice

#40

Post by oofbey »

The blog is highly suspect, but the study is real. That said it’s not a big deal.

Curing cancer in a mouse model is not at all uncommon in new therapies. Mouse models like this are vastly easier to treat than real world cancer for a bunch of reasons. Fully curing mice is the baseline for a treatment to even be considered for further evaluation. And even then very few therapies end up succeeding in humans - low single digit percent.

So yes, another possible treatment. But not at all a breakthrough.

Post reply on HN