It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Scientists discover antibody that kills prostate cancer

page: 1
6

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 06:57 AM
link   

Scientists discover antibody that kills prostate cancer


rawstory.com

The antibody, called F77, was found to bond more readily with cancerous prostate tissues and cells than with benign tissue and cells, and to promote the death of cancerous tissue, said the study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science (PNAS).

When injected in mice, F77 bonded with tissue where prostate cancer was the primary cancer in almost all cases (97 percent) and in tissue cores where the cancer had metastasized around 85 percent of the time
(visit the link for the full news article)



Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
How to kill prostate cancer!!




posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 06:57 AM
link   
As I have said before I hope this is true and will work. As I have also said before, I hope the drug companies will not be delaying or moveing to block this. As it sounds like it may be a cure, and not a treatment. As the drug companies make much less money on a cure vs a treatment. Also I do not know if the antibody is something that can be patented or not. If any one does know please do let us all know.

rawstory.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 07:04 AM
link   
Yeah, but its a mans disease. Of course it gets cured while breast cancer does not.



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 07:22 AM
link   
reply to post by LordBaskettIV
 


LordBaskett
As always thank you for posting, but I think your statment on breast cancer vs postrate cancer is not correct.


Cancer therapy budgets have in the past been (and continue to be) established with little regard for the prevalence of the disease. In fact, the therapy budgets tend to reflect the number and type of options that we have available, and so breast cancer is out in front because we have multiple modalities of therapy (screening, surgery, radiotherapy, hormones and chemotherapy). This is in stark contrast to lung cancer, in which (until very recently) most patients presented late, had multiple smoking-induced comorbidities and could only be offered palliative care. Perhaps as we develop more and better therapies for other cancers, some of the therapy budget imbalance will iron out. However, some would advocate that in a disease in which the patient's lifestyle is a major causative factor (for instance, smoking and lung cancer), the burden of care should not be borne by the rest of society. I think this is a dangerous argument. How do we know that lifestyle does not influence all cancer incidence? Perhaps we should not treat any of the sufferers, and what about cardiovascular disease?

The other factor that definitely plays a role is the activities of pressure groups or patient advocacy organizations. The demographics of breast cancer as discussed above lend themselves well to formation of groups of well educated, middle class breast cancer survivors. Hence, multiple and highly influential breast cancer groups do exist; they lobby politicians, take government organizations to court and even appeal to the European Court of Human Rights. This makes those with control of budgets sit up and take notice.breast cancer research



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 07:27 AM
link   
My grandfather has prostate cancer. i hope this cure becomes readily available soon. If not, another fail for Big Pharma



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 09:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by RedGolem

Also I do not know if the antibody is something that can be patented or not. If any one does know please do let us all know.


It is my understanding that, currently, 'biologicals' are protected by patents for five years.

However, Obama has proposed extending that to ten years and at least one of the health care reform bills has included extending that protection to twelve years.



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 10:12 AM
link   
Another cure to be tossed away. There are already drugs on the market that can me used to cure it. There are about a billion naturally occurring chemicals that fight tumors. It wouldn't be much for them to synthesize stronger analogs. If any one was serious about curing cancer they would have already.



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 10:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by mosesgunner
Another cure to be tossed away. There are already drugs on the market that can me used to cure it. There are about a billion naturally occurring chemicals that fight tumors. It wouldn't be much for them to synthesize stronger analogs. If any one was serious about curing cancer they would have already.


Cancer is not just one disease. Some cancers can be cured...depends what stage you catch it at. Tell me, please, what is the magic bullet you speak of?



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 10:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by LordBaskettIV
Yeah, but its a mans disease. Of course it gets cured while breast cancer does not.


They can cure all cancer, but its not what sex you are, but who you are. Is teh cancer patient worth saving for the system?



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 10:36 AM
link   
reply to post by gandhi
 


If the antibody can be grown in a lab, I'm sure it will be available in Russia as soon as someone can do it. It's much the same with phages. Can't get em in the United States, but they are available in Russia.



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by WTFover


It is my understanding that, currently, 'biologicals' are protected by patents for five years.

However, Obama has proposed extending that to ten years and at least one of the health care reform bills has included extending that protection to twelve years.


WTFover
I did not know that, thank you for the info. Star

It seems Obama is big pharmaceuticals best friend.



posted on Dec, 29 2009 @ 10:06 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 


dichloroacetate
curcumin
tetrahydro-cannabinol along with other cannabinols


thats off the top of my head. Curcumin and cannabinols could easily be modified to make stronger and more easily absorbed. If I had the start up money I'd start a company to start the research right away.

more:
lycopene

[edit on 29-12-2009 by mosesgunner]



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 07:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by mosesgunner
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 

dichloroacetate
curcumin
tetrahydro-cannabinol along with other cannabinols
thats off the top of my head. Curcumin and cannabinols could easily be modified to make stronger and more easily absorbed. If I had the start up money I'd start a company to start the research right away.
more:
lycopene


These you tout as cures? Research is being done, and they may have demonstrated cancer-fighting properties in a laboratory environment, but that ain't no cure.

If you can catch the disease early enough, brachytherapy (insertion of radioactive 'seeds' into the prostate) does a good job. Here's the quandary...you can noodle about with 'cures' that the ubiquitous 'some guy on the web' told you about...and as your Gleason Score and PSA rise, you lose the window of opportunity for the best effective range of treatment.

What you get instead is a risk of the cancer metastasizing to other organs, nastier treatment options, and a much higher likelihood of erectile dysfunction and incontinence...and that's if you cure it!

There are diets that discourage PS, but there is no 'alternative' cure on the market at this point, though 'zyflamend' is in clinical trials and could be a good bet, if only to keep the disease at bay.

Bottom line, you don't # around with PS.

self edit to say:
Pot? POT? Don't make me laugh!

[edit on 30-12-2009 by JohnnyCanuck]



posted on Jan, 2 2010 @ 04:42 AM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 


These are natural chemicals shown in preliminary tests to kill cancer cells. The problem is they will never get the funding to fully understand and fund the development of medication based on these chemicals. Sorry bro but if they really wanted to cure it, they could have by now. The majority of cancer money goes is toward preliminary research that goes nowhere.



posted on Jan, 3 2010 @ 09:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by mosesgunner
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 


These are natural chemicals shown in preliminary tests to kill cancer cells. The problem is they will never get the funding to fully understand and fund the development of medication based on these chemicals.


Then why are we hearing so much out of the conventional circles about the benefits of anti-oxidant rich fruit and vegetables? Why is vitamin D becoming an issue? Why are there clinical trials for Zyflamend?


Sorry bro but if they really wanted to cure it, they could have by now.


They did...they cured my prostate cancer by inserting 68 radioactive steel seeds with a half-life of 6 months, directly into the tumourous areas...based upon mapping by ultrasound. Cured...and it cost me $32 out-of-pocket!


The majority of cancer money goes is toward preliminary research that goes nowhere.


See above...that is simply a canard...I know cancer researchers and they are dedicated AND are getting results. But Cancer KILLS...if you win one, cure one, you're lucky. More are winning, more are being cured. And if anyone here on ATS has...they, themselves...personally been cured of cancer through alternative medicine, please chime in.

[edit on 3-1-2010 by JohnnyCanuck]



posted on Jan, 3 2010 @ 09:15 AM
link   
You know everyone, hate to divert the convo.

I have always thought the magic bullet for every disease is in our own bodies.

Think about it, some folk are immune to some disorders and diseases.

Others are immune to others.

When certain epidemics develop certain people can become sick and than develop the antibodies needed to fight off the disease.

Is there any research being done on this aspect of controlling or destroying disease. Our own bodies immune systems and defense mechanisms?

e.g.-Some cancer survivors have gone into spontaneous remissions that cannot be determined for what reason.



posted on Jan, 3 2010 @ 09:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by endisnighe
You know everyone, hate to divert the convo.
I have always thought the magic bullet for every disease is in our own bodies.


No diversion whatsoever...the point of the thread is that those tools may soon be at hand...to induce the body to kick-in with the right antibodies. But none of these diseases are new, though some may be environmentally enhanced we are also living long enough to die of them now.



posted on Jan, 3 2010 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 


Okay, I had read through all of the posts and the OP-just not the link, and the antibody just never even clicked in my head.

Oh well, went and read through the link and it looks promising.

Good news for a change.

Glad to see I am not completely wrong with all my theories though.

Now if someone would just create that elixir for everlasting life from dandelions I have read about.




top topics



 
6

log in

join