The Gators may not be in the Final Four this year, but the brainiacs on campus are still toiling away, regardless. Researchers at the institution (that'd be the University of Florida) have just stumbled onto a remarkable discovery that could eventually "starve cancer tumors and prevent side effects from a wide range of drugs." The magic find? A "lock-like molecule" that clasps or unclasps based on exposure to light. Sure, we've
seen our fair share of newfangled
drug delivery tools, but none that have been this noninvasive or simple to activate. In tests, gurus found that they could use visible or ultraviolet light to open or close a clasp, letting blood flow or creating a clot; in theory, this could one day be used to "prevent the formation of tiny blood vessels that feed tumors." Everything about this sounds just fantastic on the surface, but seriously, can you imagine how dead we'd be if the robots ever got ahold of this?
[Via
Physorg, image courtesy of NanotechNow]
posted April 3rd 2009 1:57AM
Hmm, that picture is somewhat terrifying all by itself.
The lock-like molecule is likely a protein
Great way to misrepresent a potentially great discovery, engadget
So much for advancements in medical technology. By refering to disease like malaria and cancer which cant totally be cured right now, there is only one way to solve its mystery, by going back to nature. The natural remedy for malaria has been discovered for centuries. A simple plant often consumed for its food property (salad like) are "sweet wormwood".
After all the remedies developed for malaria, the disease keep on mutating, rendering all previous solutions useless. By going back to basics, this sweet wormwood plant actually go after (kill) the cells that contain very very high iron content=some up to 100x normal cell (which is usually found in cancer cells and malaria = high iron is actually required for rapid reproductions of cells in cancer).
it was noted in one research that this plant was given to a dog with advanced stage of bone cancer, and within a week, it could start to walk.
This medicine was found in the ancient chinese book of medicine which was recently discovered.
Another wonder is that this medicine actually passed through the "blood barrier" usually intercept medicine from entering the brain. (well mostly). So its also suitable for brain cancer.
Great. Borg nanoprobes. Prepare to be assimilated. I guess I wouldn't mind so much if they were attached to Seven of Nine. . .
Now THIS is tech news worth posting.
TRUTH
Why doesn't americans differ between drugs and medicine?
Just because it is for medical purposes does not stop it from being a drug. (I'm from the UK)
Why doesn't people differ between singular and plural verb conjugations?
Dont worry you NEVER see this metastases in ANYTHING as soon as a major company that supplies caners drugs gets wind of it .
They will slide some fund to the University to buy it or make them shut up about it.. too much money to be lost here from the big boys to let this one out
Because there's no money to be made in curing cancer?
Think about it: would you rather go to a company that will keep you on drugs for life, or go to one that can cure you completely for a once-off mega fee? Not to mention the publicity it would get them.
This doesn't prevent cancer, it just cures it. People will still get cancer, they'll just have a better treatment for it. The company would still have a long line of cancer patients queuing to get in the door with their wallets at the ready.
@404
Is is sad to say, but you're so wrong. Hospitals already get mega-fees for chemotherapy *and* for surgery. And with a disease as common as cancer, you couldn't keep a cure to an elite group of people. No, they would only lose money.
I urge to think about this: is it possible that in at least 40 years, with all the money that's been spent on research, and all the modern tools they have been having at their disposal, almost nothing (and it's so little that 'almost' could be left out as well) has changed in its treatment? It's always the same: chemotherapy or surgery. And either of them has so-so success rates. If you factor time and money in, cancer must be billions of times harder to cure than any other disease. Do you believe that? I don't.
@giuliop
Cancer treatment has changed, and dramatically. Not just chemo and surgery, even preventative medicine has changed. The reason that there has supposedly been little progress in the last 40 years is that cancer is a hugely complex SET of diseases: it isn't a single type caused by a single factor with a single cure. It also deals with many genetic factors that we currently don't really understand: how could we when the Human genome Project only recently finished, and that doesn't even tell us what genes do?
If you need evidence about progress in the area, look up Gardasil or Cervarix. These vaccines prevent infection with the viruses responsible for around 70% of all cervical cancers. The vaccine is only possible because of cutting edge, recent research in molecular biology, immunology and virology. They're currently being deployed in several countries, and I know that in my neck of the woods the uptake is something like 90% of women targeted: in 20-30 years when these women hit the high-risk ages, the rates of cervical cancer are expected to drop dramatically.
Cancer *is* harder to cure than most other diseases because we don't understand the biology behind it, it's just that cutting edge. It's also a number of diseases with a huge number of causes. That's why it hasn't been cured.
The insurance companies/government would like this one time treatment. There are also a lot of non-profit charities that fund research like this and want to see a cure. Then again some people at the non-profits, doctors, insurance companies, and hospitals benefit from the status quo.
It sounds like it could work. Or at least give researchers one more thing to think about.
Then again, it is another Star Trek item that has come to real life.
Are you freaking kidding? Do you know how much money a company could make with this?
As it stands now each company is developing its own cancer drug to compete with the other cancer drugs (for each individual, very specific, type of cancer) which requires extensive testing to see which one is better than the last (or if a combination is better, or, or, or)... if a company could patent this technique effectively, there would be no more competition, the company executives would be wealthy beyond all reason, and when the patent expired in 17 years they would be long-retired. When a newly approved cancer drug could potentially be outdated within literally months by a different drug approval, sending millions and millions of dollars in R&D down the drain, a sure-fire thing like this is considered a gold mine.
Even beyond the clear logic of profit earnings, as someone who works for a pharma company developing cancer drugs I can tell you that there is no way this could ever be 'tucked away'. There may possibly be a few people in each organization who would focus on the money (again, ignoring the logic of the last paragraph) but the vast majority of the people truly want to make life better for disease ridden patients around the world. I mean seriously, how many people do you know that (1) have never been personally impacted by cancer and (2) are so completely heartless that they'd knowingly allow neighbors, friends, and family to suffer and die from cancer while a cure was within their reach???
Maybe you should think before you post. Idiotic comments are the cancer of the internet... be the cure.
Sorry missed the (c) in cancer
Virus.
if that is an egg on the left side of the photo where is my army?
Strobe lights would wreak havoc with this device inside people.