It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Nano-Tech, Gene Therapy WHAT GIVES?

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 11:48 AM
I don't know about everyone else, but I'm getting rather tired of our inability to cure disease when we have technology that can be used to do just that! What I'm wondering is do all these technologies operate independent of each other? Do they not communicate and work together to create cures for disease? Is competition so great that they'd rather squander over a few dollars than contribute to the betterment of man kind?

I just don't see how with nano-technology, gene therapy and other methods we haven't figured out a way to combat virus', bacteria etc.. Even if you argue, well we have! Then I'd like to know where is it? Where do you get these cures? I want to know why I keep finding videos and web sites that have detailed information and yet we don't seem to be using it... It's as it's researched, developed and then put on a shelf... So what gives?

posted on Mar, 18 2008 @ 12:26 PM
Even a mediocre interest in this field would show that they are constantly making great strides. I am a casual observer and there are many treatments for a variety of diseases in the pipeline. They just take 10+ years to get approval before they can be used.

Gene therapy halts cancer growth

Gene threrapy for damaged eyes



The small size of nanoparticles endows them with properties that can be very useful in oncology, particularly in imaging. Quantum dots (nanoparticles with quantum confinement properties, such as size-tunable light emission), when used in conjunction with MRI (magnetic resonance imaging), can produce exceptional images of tumor sites. These nanoparticles are much brighter than organic dyes and only need one light source for excitation. This means that the use of fluorescent quantum dots could produce a higher contrast image and at a lower cost than today's organic dyes. Another nanoproperty, high surface area to volume ratio, allows many functional groups to be attached to a nanoparticle, which can seek out and bind to certain tumor cells. Additionally, the small size of nanoparticles (10 to 100 nanometers), allows them to preferentially accumulate at tumor sites (because tumors lack an effective lymphatic drainage system). A very exciting research question is how to make these imaging nanoparticles do more things for cancer. For instance, is it possible to manufacture multifunctional nanoparticles that would detect, image, and then proceed to treat a tumor? This question is currently under vigorous investigation; the answer to which could shape the future of cancer treatment.[2

From Wiki article

Nanotech treatment for cancer in the works

There you, enjoy

posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 08:37 AM
reply to post by stumason

Like you said it takes 10 years to be released... It's always been that way and yet we still don't have any definitive cures... Why does it take 10 years or more for something to be released? Who controls it and do you think it's a conspiracy?

posted on Mar, 19 2008 @ 09:04 AM
reply to post by ElectricUncleSam

Well, in an nutshell, it takes that long as they have to prove the concept works, then they undergo laboratory testing on cell cultures, then on animals and, if proved safe so far, it then has to undergo clinical trials. All this takes time.

The last thing they want to do is release a treatment that doesn't work, or worse, kills the patient. I'd rather them test things fully, than not at all.

I doubt there is a conspiracy, to be honest. The Pharma that discovers the cure for cancer could make billions, so the last thing they want to do is sit on it and wait for someone else to make it. even if they hold the patent, it only lasts for a limited time, so they'd make sense to release it as soon as possible in order to maximise revenue before others can manufacture it.

posted on Mar, 20 2008 @ 08:09 AM
reply to post by stumason

True true... Everything I've read on gene therapy seems to show it has potential, but also crazy side effects including but not limited to death... Lots of patients are either dieing or developing new conditions from it... Have you heard this?

I agree with you that tests should be performed until the cure or what not is proved, but consider this... Consider the NWO... Do you think they control any of this and if they did would you think they'd release a cure when it's their goal to destroy 9/10's the population? I know there isn't any evidence really to support this theory, so it will most likely remain that, but I'd be interested to see what you thought... So maybe it's not the pharmaceutical companies holding it back... ?

top topics

log in