Thousands of academics are absolutely obsessed with finding treatments and preventions for cancers. They're not going to just sit on something if it has promise.
I don't think it would be so simple to replicate in humans. It would lead to structural changes in most types of tissue. You would need to change the level of expression of that molecule (hyaluronic acid) in each cell, or alternatively, inhibit the activity of hyaluronidase-2. This could cause ill effects on organisms that aren't adapted to such changes.
Albert Martinez governments (e.g. NIH) provide by far the most funding to academic research. The accusation that cancer researchers would hide a cure because they make more money from treatments is tired and, frankly, insulting.
The greater the funding under the control the Government, the more intense the lobbying needs to be. Is perhaps the pharmaceutical industry the only one that doesn't resort to lobbyists?
You could ask Dr. Dickson DesPommier what happened with the NIH grant to study the immunomodulatory mechanisms deployed by Trichinella to remain in the host's organism undetected for decades (with a potential application in the prevention of organ transplant rejection).
Maybe adequate treatment won't be available in the US, but in nations that have socialized healthcare, they'll jump at the opportunity to make it a reality. When Americans start going overseas to have their cancer treated, the US will make it available domestically.
Ur point is legit after all global pharma companies worth 1 trillion.
ReplyDeleteThey will come up with a "treatment" not cure for cancer
Thousands of academics are absolutely obsessed with finding treatments and preventions for cancers. They're not going to just sit on something if it has promise.
ReplyDeleteI don't think it would be so simple to replicate in humans. It would lead to structural changes in most types of tissue. You would need to change the level of expression of that molecule (hyaluronic acid) in each cell, or alternatively, inhibit the activity of hyaluronidase-2. This could cause ill effects on organisms that aren't adapted to such changes.
ReplyDeleteJoel Longoria LOL..stop saying that....u should be grateful for not looking like an ugly penis with teeth :))))))
ReplyDeleteJoel Longoria lol...just pointing the obvious...too direct for u? :)))
ReplyDeleteAlbert Martinez governments (e.g. NIH) provide by far the most funding to academic research. The accusation that cancer researchers would hide a cure because they make more money from treatments is tired and, frankly, insulting.
ReplyDeleteThe greater the funding under the control the Government, the more intense the lobbying needs to be. Is perhaps the pharmaceutical industry the only one that doesn't resort to lobbyists?
ReplyDeleteYou could ask Dr. Dickson DesPommier what happened with the NIH grant to study the immunomodulatory mechanisms deployed by Trichinella to remain in the host's organism undetected for decades (with a potential application in the prevention of organ transplant rejection).
Maybe adequate treatment won't be available in the US, but in nations that have socialized healthcare, they'll jump at the opportunity to make it a reality. When Americans start going overseas to have their cancer treated, the US will make it available domestically.
ReplyDelete