▲ 460 ▼ Scientists Destroy 99% of Cancer Cells in The Lab Using Vibrating Molecules (www.sciencealert.com) submitted 2 years ago by Rapidcreek@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world 54 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago (2 children) 99% of non-cancerous cells were also destroyed. permalink fedilink source hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] crit@links.hackliberty.org 9 points 2 years ago (1 child) I don't see the part of the article that mentions that? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Mubelotix@jlai.lu 1 point 2 years ago If they didn't mention the opposite, I have bad news for you permalink fedilink source parent [–] mihies@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) I don't get this comment at all. Wat? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] BestBouclettes@jlai.lu 17 points 2 years ago Killing cancer cells is easy enough, the hard part is only killing cancerous cells permalink fedilink source parent [–] Konstant@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (1 child) He's saying it destroys all cells, cancerous and non-cancerous. Don't know if it's true, haven't read the article. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mihies@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) Obviously it's not true hence I don't get it. The holy grail is to destroy just cancerous cells, it's easy to destroy all. 🤷♂️ permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] JGrffn@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago The article makes no mention to the molecules only working on cancer cells. The molecules, according to the article, attach to cell membranes, and then the molecules are jiggled to blow up the cells. That process doesn't mention an ability to differentiate between cancer and non-cancer cells. The technique was tried on a culture growth, where a hammer would have the same results. It was also tried on mice, where half were left cancer-free, but little is said about the process, the specifics of the results, or what happened to the other half of mice. We all get the goal of cancer research, OP is just doubtful that this achieves it, as am I, as well as anyone who's read good news about eradicating cancer in the past few decades. Most are duds or go nowhere even if initially promising, so... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] crit@links.hackliberty.org 9 points 2 years ago (1 child) I don't see the part of the article that mentions that? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Mubelotix@jlai.lu 1 point 2 years ago If they didn't mention the opposite, I have bad news for you permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Mubelotix@jlai.lu 1 point 2 years ago If they didn't mention the opposite, I have bad news for you permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mihies@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago (2 children) I don't get this comment at all. Wat? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] BestBouclettes@jlai.lu 17 points 2 years ago Killing cancer cells is easy enough, the hard part is only killing cancerous cells permalink fedilink source parent [–] Konstant@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (1 child) He's saying it destroys all cells, cancerous and non-cancerous. Don't know if it's true, haven't read the article. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mihies@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) Obviously it's not true hence I don't get it. The holy grail is to destroy just cancerous cells, it's easy to destroy all. 🤷♂️ permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] JGrffn@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago The article makes no mention to the molecules only working on cancer cells. The molecules, according to the article, attach to cell membranes, and then the molecules are jiggled to blow up the cells. That process doesn't mention an ability to differentiate between cancer and non-cancer cells. The technique was tried on a culture growth, where a hammer would have the same results. It was also tried on mice, where half were left cancer-free, but little is said about the process, the specifics of the results, or what happened to the other half of mice. We all get the goal of cancer research, OP is just doubtful that this achieves it, as am I, as well as anyone who's read good news about eradicating cancer in the past few decades. Most are duds or go nowhere even if initially promising, so... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] BestBouclettes@jlai.lu 17 points 2 years ago Killing cancer cells is easy enough, the hard part is only killing cancerous cells permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Konstant@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (1 child) He's saying it destroys all cells, cancerous and non-cancerous. Don't know if it's true, haven't read the article. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mihies@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) Obviously it's not true hence I don't get it. The holy grail is to destroy just cancerous cells, it's easy to destroy all. 🤷♂️ permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] JGrffn@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago The article makes no mention to the molecules only working on cancer cells. The molecules, according to the article, attach to cell membranes, and then the molecules are jiggled to blow up the cells. That process doesn't mention an ability to differentiate between cancer and non-cancer cells. The technique was tried on a culture growth, where a hammer would have the same results. It was also tried on mice, where half were left cancer-free, but little is said about the process, the specifics of the results, or what happened to the other half of mice. We all get the goal of cancer research, OP is just doubtful that this achieves it, as am I, as well as anyone who's read good news about eradicating cancer in the past few decades. Most are duds or go nowhere even if initially promising, so... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mihies@kbin.social 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) Obviously it's not true hence I don't get it. The holy grail is to destroy just cancerous cells, it's easy to destroy all. 🤷♂️ permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] JGrffn@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago The article makes no mention to the molecules only working on cancer cells. The molecules, according to the article, attach to cell membranes, and then the molecules are jiggled to blow up the cells. That process doesn't mention an ability to differentiate between cancer and non-cancer cells. The technique was tried on a culture growth, where a hammer would have the same results. It was also tried on mice, where half were left cancer-free, but little is said about the process, the specifics of the results, or what happened to the other half of mice. We all get the goal of cancer research, OP is just doubtful that this achieves it, as am I, as well as anyone who's read good news about eradicating cancer in the past few decades. Most are duds or go nowhere even if initially promising, so... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] JGrffn@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago The article makes no mention to the molecules only working on cancer cells. The molecules, according to the article, attach to cell membranes, and then the molecules are jiggled to blow up the cells. That process doesn't mention an ability to differentiate between cancer and non-cancer cells. The technique was tried on a culture growth, where a hammer would have the same results. It was also tried on mice, where half were left cancer-free, but little is said about the process, the specifics of the results, or what happened to the other half of mice. We all get the goal of cancer research, OP is just doubtful that this achieves it, as am I, as well as anyone who's read good news about eradicating cancer in the past few decades. Most are duds or go nowhere even if initially promising, so... permalink fedilink source parent