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

Light-induced whole-molecule vibration can rupture melanoma cells’ membrane

news.rice.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 44 posts

Re: Light-induced whole-molecule vibration can rupture melanoma cells’ membrane

#11

Post by dghughes »

benjijay wrote: post #7
Austizzle wrote: post #2

The real question is always "but how good is it at killing non-cancer cells?" A bullet fired from a gun would be great at killing cancer cells too. Although in this case it seems like it's just an alternative to surgery, rather than a cancer cure? Just a way of vibrating cells in a certain location to death? Does anybody who actually understands medicine know if this is a great breakthrough or not?

I am not a biologist but I've known a few in my time; It is highly unlikely there will ever be a singular "cure for cancer" as cancer is a bit of a blanket term given to multiple diseases, however this is a seemingly reasonably good breakthrough in treatment - being able to destroy cancerous cells without exposing the patient to further harm via targeted radiation or harsh chemo drugs (basically targeted poisoning) f…

Or better yet find out how to prevent cancers since it's better to not be sick than to treat you once you are sick.

Things like the HPV vaccine which in my province saw a 90% drop in just a few years. I think everyone should get it no questions asked which maybe they don't anymore?

The Hepatitis B vaccine too since having the disease is a cause of liver cancer.

But if all else fails it's also good to have a tools to try to get rid of cancers.

Re: Light-induced whole-molecule vibration can rupture melanoma cells’ membrane

#12

Post by unsupp0rted »

once_inc wrote: post #9
benjijay wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not a biologist but I've known a few in my time; It is highly unlikely there will ever be a singular "cure for cancer" as cancer is a bit of a blanket term given to multiple diseases, however this is a seemingly reasonably good breakthrough in treatment - being able to destroy cancerous cells without exposing the patient to further harm via targeted radiation or harsh chemo drugs (basically targeted poisoning) f…

> It is highly unlikely there will ever be a singular "cure for cancer" as cancer is a bit of a blanket term given to multiple diseases, "It doesn't make sense to say 'cure for cancer.' Cancer is a wide variety of disorders with different manifestations and etiology. It makes as much sense as saying 'a cure for virus'." > https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2011-11-21

An enhanced immune system would functionally be a “cure for virus”.

It’s conceivable we could find a technique that targets and ruptures any cancer cell, functionally becoming a “cure for cancer”.

Re: Light-induced whole-molecule vibration can rupture melanoma cells’ membrane

#13

Post by onetimeuse92304 »

Austizzle wrote: post #2

The real question is always "but how good is it at killing non-cancer cells?" A bullet fired from a gun would be great at killing cancer cells too. Although in this case it seems like it's just an alternative to surgery, rather than a cancer cure? Just a way of vibrating cells in a certain location to death? Does anybody who actually understands medicine know if this is a great breakthrough or not?

We are currently using radiation therapy which focuses gamma rays on a piece of tissue with cancer cells to kill it.

If you can do the same but instead of gamma rays use infrared, even if it kills indiscriminately, that should still be a net positive, don't you think?

And the main benefit here is that you can get these molecules into specific cells which in theory should allow killing cells based on some chemical characteristic.

Re: Light-induced whole-molecule vibration can rupture melanoma cells’ membrane

#14

Post by onetimeuse92304 »

benjijay wrote: post #7
Austizzle wrote: post #2

The real question is always "but how good is it at killing non-cancer cells?" A bullet fired from a gun would be great at killing cancer cells too. Although in this case it seems like it's just an alternative to surgery, rather than a cancer cure? Just a way of vibrating cells in a certain location to death? Does anybody who actually understands medicine know if this is a great breakthrough or not?

I am not a biologist but I've known a few in my time; It is highly unlikely there will ever be a singular "cure for cancer" as cancer is a bit of a blanket term given to multiple diseases, however this is a seemingly reasonably good breakthrough in treatment - being able to destroy cancerous cells without exposing the patient to further harm via targeted radiation or harsh chemo drugs (basically targeted poisoning) f…

I am of more positive thinking here. I think our problems with cancer are due to misunderstanding what cancer is in the first place.

Here, Thomas Seyfried can explain this much better than I ever could: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KusaU2taxow

I think once we know where cancer comes from we can be much more effective at preventing it in the first place (proper diet) and treating it after the fact. With the current progress I think at some point we should be able to prevent pretty much close to all deaths from cancer.

Obviously, people will always be dying of something so preventing a cancer will only mean we will have other challenges to face.

Re: Light-induced whole-molecule vibration can rupture melanoma cells’ membrane

#15

Post by benjijay »

onetimeuse92304 wrote: post #14
benjijay wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not a biologist but I've known a few in my time; It is highly unlikely there will ever be a singular "cure for cancer" as cancer is a bit of a blanket term given to multiple diseases, however this is a seemingly reasonably good breakthrough in treatment - being able to destroy cancerous cells without exposing the patient to further harm via targeted radiation or harsh chemo drugs (basically targeted poisoning) f…

I am of more positive thinking here. I think our problems with cancer are due to misunderstanding what cancer is in the first place. Here, Thomas Seyfried can explain this much better than I ever could: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KusaU2taxow I think once we know where cancer comes from we can be much more effective at preventing it in the first place (proper diet) and treating it after the fact. With the current…

It's been a few years since I was as deep into this realm so I might be slightly off but;

Cancers and Tumors mostly happen as a result of some errant mutation - there are limitless causes for such things and the best diet in the world can't save you from random biological chance or solar radiation. Everything comes with a risk and 98 times out of 100 your own defences will see this mutation happen and shut it down before it gets too far

A 100% effective 'prevention' for cancer would basically be a souped-up immune system to the point that we basically never get meaningfully sick, and probably live another 30-50 years as a result (most cases of "died of old age" are more like "had 7 different minor cancers which overwhelmed the body's systems")

Re: Light-induced whole-molecule vibration can rupture melanoma cells’ membrane

#16

Post by inkcapmushroom »

H8crilA wrote: post #3
Austizzle wrote: post #2

The real question is always "but how good is it at killing non-cancer cells?" A bullet fired from a gun would be great at killing cancer cells too. Although in this case it seems like it's just an alternative to surgery, rather than a cancer cure? Just a way of vibrating cells in a certain location to death? Does anybody who actually understands medicine know if this is a great breakthrough or not?

Every single cancer treatment is about destroying cancer cells. Given the clickbait level of the headline it's clear that it is not worth clicking.

>Given the clickbait level of the headline

That is not a clickbait headline, it's very descriptive of the contents of the article. Clickbait would be like "Crazy new cancer cure will literally punch cancer cells to death! You won't believe it!"

Re: Light-induced whole-molecule vibration can rupture melanoma cells’ membrane

#17

Post by chefandy »

benjijay wrote: post #15
onetimeuse92304 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am of more positive thinking here. I think our problems with cancer are due to misunderstanding what cancer is in the first place. Here, Thomas Seyfried can explain this much better than I ever could: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KusaU2taxow I think once we know where cancer comes from we can be much more effective at preventing it in the first place (proper diet) and treating it after the fact. With the current…

It's been a few years since I was as deep into this realm so I might be slightly off but; Cancers and Tumors mostly happen as a result of some errant mutation - there are limitless causes for such things and the best diet in the world can't save you from random biological chance or solar radiation. Everything comes with a risk and 98 times out of 100 your own defences will see this mutation happen and shut it down be…

Yeah— it's obviously worth interrogating how our environments affect our cancer risk, but considering that the disease was named by Hippocrates in the 300s BCE, it seems pretty unlikely that any single avoidable environmental factor could be "the cause," or any single factor could be "the mechanism."

Re: Light-induced whole-molecule vibration can rupture melanoma cells’ membrane

#18

Post by b4ke »

onetimeuse92304 wrote: post #14
benjijay wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not a biologist but I've known a few in my time; It is highly unlikely there will ever be a singular "cure for cancer" as cancer is a bit of a blanket term given to multiple diseases, however this is a seemingly reasonably good breakthrough in treatment - being able to destroy cancerous cells without exposing the patient to further harm via targeted radiation or harsh chemo drugs (basically targeted poisoning) f…

I am of more positive thinking here. I think our problems with cancer are due to misunderstanding what cancer is in the first place. Here, Thomas Seyfried can explain this much better than I ever could: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KusaU2taxow I think once we know where cancer comes from we can be much more effective at preventing it in the first place (proper diet) and treating it after the fact. With the current…

Lies. Lies about the nature of shared-conception. The universe is a representation of the collective will, and lies obfuscate that in ways that are consequential.

Re: Light-induced whole-molecule vibration can rupture melanoma cells’ membrane

#19

Post by b4ke »

b4ke wrote: post #18
onetimeuse92304 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am of more positive thinking here. I think our problems with cancer are due to misunderstanding what cancer is in the first place. Here, Thomas Seyfried can explain this much better than I ever could: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KusaU2taxow I think once we know where cancer comes from we can be much more effective at preventing it in the first place (proper diet) and treating it after the fact. With the current…

Lies. Lies about the nature of shared-conception. The universe is a representation of the collective will, and lies obfuscate that in ways that are consequential.

It’s unfortunate that the intellectual curiosity of religious leaders led to science, as they are probably also responsible for the problems it seeks to solve.

Re: Light-induced whole-molecule vibration can rupture melanoma cells’ membrane

#20

Post by benjijay »

chefandy wrote: post #17
benjijay wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's been a few years since I was as deep into this realm so I might be slightly off but; Cancers and Tumors mostly happen as a result of some errant mutation - there are limitless causes for such things and the best diet in the world can't save you from random biological chance or solar radiation. Everything comes with a risk and 98 times out of 100 your own defences will see this mutation happen and shut it down be…

Yeah— it's obviously worth interrogating how our environments affect our cancer risk, but considering that the disease was named by Hippocrates in the 300s BCE, it seems pretty unlikely that any single avoidable environmental factor could be "the cause," or any single factor could be "the mechanism."

Certainly there are myriad 'causes', and likely at least a few mechanisms if you get into specifics, but as a general rule a cancerous tumour is a group of cells that multiply faster than they die (or don't die at all), and consume resources without 'giving back' to the organ in which they reside - effectively the "I have outlived my designated usefulness" switch gets commented out and replaced with "multiply even harder, forever"
Post reply on HN