Cancers can be detected in bloodstream three years prior to diagnosis
Technology
26
Beiträge
16
Kommentatoren
65
Aufrufe
-
This post did not contain any content.
Cancers can be detected in bloodstream three years prior to diagnosis
Detection of cancer before a clinical diagnosis could give patients and caregivers more time for intervention and may lead to better outcomes because tumors are more likely to be curable
The Hub (hub.jhu.edu)
-
This post did not contain any content.
Cancers can be detected in bloodstream three years prior to diagnosis
Detection of cancer before a clinical diagnosis could give patients and caregivers more time for intervention and may lead to better outcomes because tumors are more likely to be curable
The Hub (hub.jhu.edu)
I thought cancer comes a goes all the time, wouldn't that give a lot of people false positives and a start to the cascade of healthcare?
-
This post did not contain any content.
Cancers can be detected in bloodstream three years prior to diagnosis
Detection of cancer before a clinical diagnosis could give patients and caregivers more time for intervention and may lead to better outcomes because tumors are more likely to be curable
The Hub (hub.jhu.edu)
What? This BETTER not be US funded Research! I DONT want MY Tax Dollars going to THIS when there's SAD BILLIONAIRES still out there!
-LITERALLY everyone who Voted for Trump!
-
I thought cancer comes a goes all the time, wouldn't that give a lot of people false positives and a start to the cascade of healthcare?
Not really, no. It's only really cancer once the cells multiply uncontrollably. Yes, sometimes cells don't properly perform apoptosis, but there are other mechanisms that will target and kill those precancerous cells. Only once those other mechanisms fail does it become true cancer.
Besides, even if this test did come back positive, they'd still have to identify a tumor and monitor. If you have a teeny-tiny benign tumor that isn't hurting anything, the best course of action is to just leave it alone and monitor. Any surgical procedure risks spillage, which is basically human-induced metastasis.
-
Not really, no. It's only really cancer once the cells multiply uncontrollably. Yes, sometimes cells don't properly perform apoptosis, but there are other mechanisms that will target and kill those precancerous cells. Only once those other mechanisms fail does it become true cancer.
Besides, even if this test did come back positive, they'd still have to identify a tumor and monitor. If you have a teeny-tiny benign tumor that isn't hurting anything, the best course of action is to just leave it alone and monitor. Any surgical procedure risks spillage, which is basically human-induced metastasis.
That makes sense if I'm understanding you correctly. You might have cancerous cells, but it's not actually cancer.
-
That makes sense if I'm understanding you correctly. You might have cancerous cells, but it's not actually cancer.
Right. Like you might walk by someone with a cold, and inhale a small number of their virus particles. But your immune system can handle that. If you spend a lot of time with them face-to-face, the virus gets a foothold (because of inhaling more viruses, this part isn't a perfect metaphor) and starts multiplying, it can overwhelm the first line of defense and become an infection.
-
What? This BETTER not be US funded Research! I DONT want MY Tax Dollars going to THIS when there's SAD BILLIONAIRES still out there!
-LITERALLY everyone who Voted for Trump!
Why should the world benefit from our taxpayer funded research? I want my taxes spent on training Americans so as to let the world watch (for free) fast running and swimming.
Am still waiting for a skipping event in the Olympics.
-
Why should the world benefit from our taxpayer funded research? I want my taxes spent on training Americans so as to let the world watch (for free) fast running and swimming.
Am still waiting for a skipping event in the Olympics.
The world isn't benefitting from your research, you benefit from the world's research based off your own research, on and on it goes and we all get smarter and know more and strive towards bettering our condition, curing our ills and minimizing suffering and maximizing happiness for all.
At least in my opinion it's why scientific research while a truly neutral morally activity and generally done as an end unto itself - from a broadly humanist standpoint - is worth pursuing, even when the immediate benefits aren't seen by the shortsighted.
-
I thought cancer comes a goes all the time, wouldn't that give a lot of people false positives and a start to the cascade of healthcare?
The article says they're detecting DNA shedding of genetic mutations. I think one example of this could be cancer caused by HPV should shed DNA that they could identify.
It's probably different but that's what I'm thinking from that line
-
What? This BETTER not be US funded Research! I DONT want MY Tax Dollars going to THIS when there's SAD BILLIONAIRES still out there!
-LITERALLY everyone who Voted for Trump!
Trump also got the covid vaccine invented, produced, and distributed. It was probably the greatest thing he ever did but now he doesn't even want to be associated with it. Alas. His lunacy knows no bounds.
-
The world isn't benefitting from your research, you benefit from the world's research based off your own research, on and on it goes and we all get smarter and know more and strive towards bettering our condition, curing our ills and minimizing suffering and maximizing happiness for all.
At least in my opinion it's why scientific research while a truly neutral morally activity and generally done as an end unto itself - from a broadly humanist standpoint - is worth pursuing, even when the immediate benefits aren't seen by the shortsighted.
Even if we were the only country researching...
I have heard GOP politicians saying something like "why should we fund a cure for a disease and everyone else benefits without spending a cent?"
Why doesn't their national pride on the world stage extend beyond sport?
-
Trump also got the covid vaccine invented, produced, and distributed. It was probably the greatest thing he ever did but now he doesn't even want to be associated with it. Alas. His lunacy knows no bounds.
Yes and no, warp speed only needed to exist in the form it did because Trump had fired the existing pandemic response team.
-
Even if we were the only country researching...
I have heard GOP politicians saying something like "why should we fund a cure for a disease and everyone else benefits without spending a cent?"
Why doesn't their national pride on the world stage extend beyond sport?
Because that wouldn't make as much money.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Cancers can be detected in bloodstream three years prior to diagnosis
Detection of cancer before a clinical diagnosis could give patients and caregivers more time for intervention and may lead to better outcomes because tumors are more likely to be curable
The Hub (hub.jhu.edu)
Can someone clarify which blood test was used? I want to get tested every two years.
-
The article says they're detecting DNA shedding of genetic mutations. I think one example of this could be cancer caused by HPV should shed DNA that they could identify.
It's probably different but that's what I'm thinking from that line
Look up extra-cellular vesicles. This is where the magic is.
-
Because that wouldn't make as much money.
Olympic gold medals don't make money. It is for national pride. Even hosting the games does not always make money.
Actually I am Aussie. 12 years ago it was calculated that each gold medal costs us AU$12m (so about US$11m in today's money). It embarrasses me.
They kill us for their sport: Williamson laments arts funding cuts
Australia's best known playwright, David Williamson, has attacked the nation's "huge" spending on sports while a "pittance" is spent developing the next Cate Blanchett or Geoffrey Rush.
The Sydney Morning Herald (www.smh.com.au)
-
Olympic gold medals don't make money. It is for national pride. Even hosting the games does not always make money.
Actually I am Aussie. 12 years ago it was calculated that each gold medal costs us AU$12m (so about US$11m in today's money). It embarrasses me.
They kill us for their sport: Williamson laments arts funding cuts
Australia's best known playwright, David Williamson, has attacked the nation's "huge" spending on sports while a "pittance" is spent developing the next Cate Blanchett or Geoffrey Rush.
The Sydney Morning Herald (www.smh.com.au)
I am no fan of Eurovision but it is good value for national pride:
Eurovision is funded by participating broadcasters and this contribution is a total of €6.2 million (£5.2 million), combined.
Everything you need to know about who funds Eurovision
The Eurovision Song Contest is the most popular music contest of the year, which sees 39 countries from actress Europe, and Australia, come together for a magnificent show – but who funds it all?
Daily Star (www.dailystar.co.uk)
-
I am no fan of Eurovision but it is good value for national pride:
Eurovision is funded by participating broadcasters and this contribution is a total of €6.2 million (£5.2 million), combined.
Everything you need to know about who funds Eurovision
The Eurovision Song Contest is the most popular music contest of the year, which sees 39 countries from actress Europe, and Australia, come together for a magnificent show – but who funds it all?
Daily Star (www.dailystar.co.uk)
Only 6M €? For an event of that size that feels a lot cheaper than I would have thought.
-
Can someone clarify which blood test was used? I want to get tested every two years.
just go to an oncologist and get screened
source: i did cancer
-
Only 6M €? For an event of that size that feels a lot cheaper than I would have thought.
Don't forget that there is also income from advertising and ticket sales.
