/sci/ - Science & Math

How does it identify cancer cells from healthy cells?

>>11390480
Next week on retraction watch kek

>>11390480
>telegraph
any non-popsci links?

>>11390614
it's on the 2nd line of the article, retard

>>11390480
cancer research and cancer treatment is a big a lucrative industry, there will be no cure for foreseeable future because a cure is simply not nearly profitable

>>11390727
thats capitalism and human nature are futile forces.

>>11390490
Like all T cells do: with some modification of MHC-like when there is a mutation in the genes. That's how cells infected by viruses are killed.

>>11390727
>>11390776
Stfu commie retards

>>11390480
Does it work for women's rights?

>>11390480
nice i have cancer

>>11390727
How is his statement not an oxymoron?

>>11390480
*GASP* did they discover......... MEMORY T-CELLS? OH MY GOD DISCOVERY OF THE CENTURY we've only known about these since forever, give these people a nobel please!

>>11390490

It can tell just by lookin' at 'em!

>>11390727
>A cure is not profitable
>1/3 people develop cancer in their lifetimes
Literally a third of the population is a potential customer, how is this not profitable.

>>11390888
MHC is a molecule that shuttles peptides from the cell to the surface through the ER.
TCRs bind to those MHC-I associated peptides to detect self vs non-self peptides. Non-self = evil = kill it with fire.
T-cells are educated in the thymus, the only gland in the body to become smaller with age. At the end comes out naive T-cells which are either CD4+ or CD8+ (or, rarely, both). CD8+ T-cells generally participate in signalling while CD4+ T-cells generally participate in surveillance. They come to life fresh as so-called naive T-cells but become memory T-cells when they first come into contact with non-self MHC-I associated peptides. More recently, it has been shown that there are also so-called 'virtual naive T-cells' whose phenotype resembles a mix of naive and memory T-cells. It's not yet clear what's up with them.
Additionally, NK cells, B cells and NKT cells perform different form of immunosurveillance as well. NK and NKT cells can recognize infected cells without making use of MHC-* associated peptides are their functioning is not yet well understood. B-cells use MHC-II associated peptides instead of MHC-I associated peptides.
The expression profile of HLA (MHC-encoding genes in humans) genes associated with MHC-II is actually a lot cleaner than that of HLA genes associated with MHC-I in most cancers, but piercing the secrets of the latter is seen as a priority as it should reveal a live snapshot of cell state and allow for the development of novel therapies more readily than for MHC-II.

>>11390727
rich people would be desperate to cure their cancers though you absolute retard

>>11391704
cd8 is the receptor for mhc 1. It exposes peptides from inside the cell on the surface, while mhc2 exposes peptides from phagocytosis. cd4 is the receptor for mhc2.
so, t cd8 is the cytotoxic one, it detects when a cell is expressing non self proteins via mhc1 (virus infection, cancer).
t cd4 is the "helper", which orchestrates the response against pathogens that have been phagocyted and whose proteins have been decomposed into peptides that are exposed on the surface via mhc2.

>>11391704
b cells produce antibodies when they're activated by t cd4 helper cells which have already been activated by recognition of a patogen's peptide which have been exposed on the surface of an antigen presenting cell (dendritic cells, macrophages) via mhc 2 after phagocytising the pathogen.

>>11391699
>>11391707
You are, in fact, the retards here.
he meant that a therapy that cures the patient is less lucrative than one that just keeps them alive but they need it constatly for the rest of their lives, or else it comes back again and kills them. So, instead of selling it one time, they're going to buy it for the rest of their lives. Like HIV and other many diseases.

>>11391699
Treatment = forced continued payments. Cure = single lump-sum payment then off to the next one.

>>11391704
one way the NK cells detects a cell to be killed is the lack of self peptides exposition via mhc 1.
many cancers have evolved the ability to supress mhc 1 expression, just so that the cell wont expose it's cancerous peptides to be detected by t cd8 cells. So, our immune system evolved the nk cells, which kill anything that won't show what's inside to them.

>>11391751
Yeah, colon cancers are well known to show this ability for example. They also emit decoy molecules to trick and slow down NK cells.

>>11391751
>it's like the right wing death squad:
>show me your document now!
>if you show it, and it's falsified, you're dead (t cd8)
>if you won't even show it, then you're fucking dead too (nk)

>>11391721
all cells must express mhc 1, and expose self peptides on the surface with it, so that the immune system knows they're friends.
mhc 2 is only expressed on phagocytic cells, to expose peptides from what's been phagocyted.

>>11390888
not my fault humans are weak minded faggots such as yourself.

>>11390888
whats the antigen and why is this antigen present on so many different types of cancers

>>11390480
>another WE'VE JUST FOUND THE CURE OF CANCER thread

>>11390727
TB research and treatment is a big lucrative industry, there will be no cure
Also smallbox
And rabies
And polio
Hell any medical treatment is a big lucrative industry
That's why car safety will never catch on
Neither will tobacco cessation

>>11390490
scishow has a video on it

>>11392150
>scishow

>>11391698
But that's racist

>>11391759
Kek

>>11392154
based kike

>>11391751
How do cancers evolve? They leave no descendents

>>11392244
Cancer aren't viruses.
It's just uncontrolled cell growth and it's different for every type. If it killed earlier before people could reproduce then it wouldn't exist

>>11390895

>>11392264
>If it killed earlier before people could reproduce then it wouldn't exist
Excuse me what?

>>11392275
The genes that eventually cause cancers wouldn't be present in our genome if it struck explicitly before sexual maturity

>>11392279
It's not the genes that cause cancer, but the spontanic mutations in our cells which allow them uncontrolled reproduction (normal cells have a system that stops them to do so). Such mutations are quite common in our bodies, however most of them are dealt with by our immumity system. Cancer is basically those rare cases when the system fails and big chunks of mutated cell are formed. Your genome has nothing to do with all that. You can only inherit a higher tendency for such mutations or rather some flaws in the immunity system.

this sounds really awesome. I wish I understood most of this shit, and even "skeptics" seem very interested:
https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/01/researchers-find-immune-cells-that-seem-to-be-specific-to-cancer/

too bad they already sold(?) their patents to a private company:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ervaxx-cardiff-university-enter-collaboration-080000828.html

>>11390727
>>11390776
>>11392121
lots of people have been saved from some cancer types thanks to research and treatments (including myself: see hodgkin's lymphoma), retards.

>>11392121
Wasn't small pox eradicated worldwide? Also rabies doesn't exist in the U.K. anymore.

>>11392462
Cancers run in families though. I understand it's complicated and different for each type but you cannot tell me that it would be impossible to engineer a human that didn't get cancer.

>>11393598
Congratulations, you have autism and are probably also retarded. Would listing rinderpest have made it too easy?

>>11390480
Cancer was cured in 1920. We develop cancers more readily because vaccines turn off parts of our immune system.

>>11395395
>Cancer was cured in 1920
Cancer is not one thing.

>>11395395
>because vaccines turn off parts of our immune system.
Source?

>>11392817
>too bad they already sold(?) their patents to a private company
Nooooo! Goodbye, cure for cancer.

>>11390480
>NOOO NOT THE CANCERINO WE MUST FIGHT DEATH
We must die, our programmed obsolescence is evolutionarily advantageous, and we must die of something.

>>11392462
>missing the point this hard
People genetically prone to dying of cancer by the age of 5 would quickly have their shitty genes taken out. So there's a strong evolutionary pressure against being likely to die from cancer before being done reproducing (and in certain environments being done supporting your offsprings until they can survive alone).

>>11395824
>NOOOO YOU WERE MEANT TO BE KEK YOUR LIFE TO EVOLUTION!!! STOP USING UNNATURAL TECHNOLOGY TO UNDO YOUR EVOLUTIONARY PURPOSE!!! YOUR LIFE ISN'T YOURS TO LIVE!!! WE ARE ALL JUST SACRIFICIAL ANIMALS TO EVOLUTION!!!! THINK ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT!!!! LIVE YOUR BEST LIFE!!!!

>>11395349
It would be impossible to engineer a human who literally cannot get cancer. The closest I can imagine would be to splice a person with DNA from organisms who are naturally extraordinarily resilient to cancers. Axolotls for example are about a million times less likely to develop a cancer compared to humans, they can also regenerate entire limbs, organ systems, and even portions of their CNS. This dopey fucking lizard would be a prime candidate for use in human genotherapy assuming first that it becomes legal and widespread, and secondly assuming that Mexico doesn't extinguish the species by dumping literal human shit and garbage into every water source in their country.

>>11391747
Ah yes, similar to how we haven't cured polio so that we can sell iron lungs and iron lung maintenance

>>11390776
>that's capitalism
ERRRRRRRR WRONG IT'S ACTUALLY SOCIALISM THAT ENFORCES THIS FUCKING SHIT

ENTER RISUG... OTHERWISE KNOWN AS FUCKING MICROCHIPS IN YOUR FUCKING BALLSACK WHICH YOU CAN SWITCH ON AND OFF TO DECIDE IF YOU WANT TO HAVE SPERM IN YOUR CUM OR NOT?!?!

HOW DID THE CORPORATE SOCIALIST CRONY GOVERNMENT PHARMACEUTICAL ***********MAFIA********* STOP THIS FROM ENTERING (((((((((CLINICAL TRIALS)))))))))))? OH OF COURSE, WITH SOCIALIST GOVERNMENT VIOLENCE (IE LICENCE FEES)

SO YEAH NO SHIT THERE IS AN INDIVIDUAL PROFITTING FROM THIS BUT THEY ARE USING THE SOCIALIST GOVERNMENT TO DO IT

LOOK AT CHINA, THE MOST COMMUNIST COUNTRY ON EARTH, AND THEY SELL SLAVE LABOR TO AMERICAN COMPANIES LIKE APPLE... GREAT HHUH????

>hurr durr the government is so corrupt and controlled by corporations that's why we should raise taxes to get rid of the corruption

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reversible_inhibition_of_sperm_under_guidance
>Reversible inhibition of sperm under guidance (RISUG), formerly referred to as the synthetic polymer styrene maleic anhydride (SMA), is the development name of a male contraceptive injection developed at IIT Kharagpur in India by the team of Dr. Sujoy K. Guha. Phase III clinical trials are underway in India, slowed by insufficient volunteers.[1] It has been patented in India, China, Bangladesh, and the United States.[1] A method based on RISUG, Vasalgel, is currently under development in the US. However there has been little or no progress in terms of bringing the product to market.[2]

IF YOU FUCKING CURE CANCER YOU ARE AN AUTOMATIC BILLIONAIRE AND THERE ARE BILLIONS DONATED FROM THE MARKET TO RESEARCH STFU YOU DUMB FUCKING COMMUNIST BOOOTLICKER

is cancer more common in mixed race people?

>>11392264
>If it killed earlier before people could reproduce then it wouldn't exist

>>11392279
Its something like 8 mutations, if one cell gets ~5 simultaneously before it’s killed it becomes cancerous

>>11395831
>>missing the point this hard
you're both arguing two sides of the same coin, lol. That anon is referring to cancer as a consequence of natural mutation, whereas you're taking a clearly genetic predisposition standpoint. The latter is admittedly much more rare than the former, so any selective pressure against cancer is most likely negligible.

>>11396395
no

I thought we cured cancer with malaria already.

>>11396334
That was long ago. Have you noticed the trend that software is only sold in subscription systems recently? Adobe CC, Office 365, etc.
This is what's coming at us.

>>11392279
You do realise all oncogenes are vital to cell cycle control? Until the go haywire of course

>>11398494
That's because software requires updates. Updates require continuous effort on the part of the programmer. In order to compensate appropriately for continuous effort, they ask for a subscription.

The people who are trying to invent a cure are not the same as the people profiting off the medicine that alleviates the symptoms of disease. If they seem to be inventing a cure, it is in the drug company's best interest to buy the rights as soon as possible and extract as much money as they can while they have a patent, otherwise their competitors would do it, and they wouldn't see any profit.

We currently have a large number of diseases that require continuous medical care. If we cure a few of these, more will take their place as more people live longer. This has always been the case. For example, heart disease was rare until around 1950, alzheimers is on the rise, so is diabetes. We may cure all of these, but more will take their place. And there will always be money in curing these things.

Anyway, insurance already is a subscription model of healthcare. The only missing thing is vertical integration. That's the next big step.

>>11391699
Because a cure will probably lie in a variable protocol of generic substances tailored to the individual to restore a healthy metabolism

Good luck making money on baking soda, aspirin and diet advice

>>11390614
then why not post it directly, retard

>>11399091
I like how you put effort into arguig with a retarded

>>11396334
>Haven't cured polio
What rock have you been hiding under, types 2 and 3 were eradicated with type one under the brink of extinction.

>>11400526
>call himself a retard
so rude

>>11390727
>profit
fuck off commie shit

>>11395824
fuck off collectivist shit

>>11390490
it is probably bullshit

>>11400830
What the fuck is retarded about saying that software is sold in subscription-based packages? Idiot.

>>11399091
The reasons don't matter. I also don't think that's the reason why subscription came up so much recently. If you bought software, you bought it with support for, say, two years and therefore paid for 2 years worth of patches.

>people who are trying to invent a cure are not the same as the people profiting off the medicine that alleviates the symptoms of disease
I know, that's why it's so demotivating when hearing that researchers sold their solutions to private companies. That's where conflicting interests arise.

>more will take their place
There's no guarantee at all. Same situation as with continued growth in economy.

>vertical integration
What do you mean?

>>11399091
>software requires updates. Updates require continuous effort on the part of the programmer. In order to compensate appropriately for continuous effort, they ask for a subscription.
"Good luck with your new heart. Oh, we didn't see it coming that a slight numerical error makes it inefficient after three years in some patients. Oh wait, you didn't pay for updates?"

Everyone is misunderstanding how capitalism works. If this treatment works, it will be profitable because
A) New companies can offer this as a competitive edge against greedy companies trying to push chemo
B) Old companies will recognize this threat and improve so that they themselves are not overshadowed by the new treatment.

>>11402617
Capitalism is dead, bro. Why are there still newspapers around? Etc.

>>11403119
>Why are there still newspapers around?
I still read them on break and do the sudoku

>>11402586
Vertical integration would be the combination of an insurance company with a hospital. A form of this is already going on with CVS offering insurance and pharmacy.

>>11399091
>That's because software requires updates. Updates require continuous effort on the part of the programmer. In order to compensate appropriately for continuous effort, they ask for a subscription.
It actually doesn't. You really don't *need* to update software except for maybe bugfixes.
Subscription based licensing with constant updates is one of many possible development and licensing models.

>The people who are trying to invent a cure are not the same as the people profiting off the medicine that alleviates the symptoms of disease. If they seem to be inventing a cure, it is in the drug company's best interest to buy the rights as soon as possible and extract as much money as they can while they have a patent, otherwise their competitors would do it, and they wouldn't see any profit.
And they do that by creating treatments that milk the patient of as much money as possible. That will generally involve continuous treatment.

>We currently have a large number of diseases that require continuous medical care. If we cure a few of these, more will take their place as more people live longer.
You can't assume that that will be a holding trend and also to the companies that doesn't matter since it's not guaranteed that they would be the one to offer a cure to the next big disease

>>11399091
>That's because software requires updates. Updates require continuous effort on the part of the programmer.
this is right

>In order to compensate appropriately for continuous effort, they ask for a subscription.
lol, no. they don't need to do that. the subscription-based model is a way to extract more money from clients, and nothing else.

>>11402424
why are brazilians so retarded? they still believe in black magic, they still have slaves, they are now burning the fucking amazon, and they will believe what any random "expert" sells to "cure cancer"...

>>11404810
> why are 3rd worlders retards?

>>11392121
>>11396334
All of these are infectious diseases that literally force you to cure them if you don't want them killing everyone in the planet sooner or later. Cancer is just a very wide and old non infectious disease that is also one of the main population controllers. There are two good reasons to never cure cancer, and only one to do it; but even if you don't cure it, you still get money (the one good reason). Even if a cure for all cancer exists, it's not realistic to implement it without some worldwide reform to reproductive rights.

>>11396172
>This dopey fucking lizard
>mexican walking FISH

>>11405919
brazilians aren't really representative of 3rd worlders IMO. some (most?) of them seem really dumb, almost brain damaged.