Cancers can be detected in bloodstream three years prior to diagnosis
Technology
26
Beiträge
16
Kommentatoren
76
Aufrufe
-
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.
-
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)
Yes but, is it profitable?
Someone has to ask the real world questions
-
Yes but, is it profitable?
Someone has to ask the real world questions
If everyone gets tested yearly until they die, this could total as much as most cancer treatments and suffering combined and it would probably still be better for everyone if nobody has to go through that anymore.
-
Yes and no, warp speed only needed to exist in the form it did because Trump had fired the existing pandemic response team.
Good point. On the other hand, Canada didn't fare any better even without firing its pandemic response team. I suspect project warp speed would have been welcomed either way, even if it was more important in this timeline.
-
Good point. On the other hand, Canada didn't fare any better even without firing its pandemic response team. I suspect project warp speed would have been welcomed either way, even if it was more important in this timeline.
-
A million americans died of COVID (yes, some of them would have died without); but half a million would still be very bad.
-
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)
Bit misleading. Tumour-associated antigens can very easily be detected very early. Problem is, these are only associated with cancer, and provide a very high rate of false positives
They're better used as a stepping stone for further testing, or just seeing how advanced a cancer is
That is to say, I'm assuming that's what this is about, as i didnt rwad the article. It's the first thing I thought of when I heard "cancer in bloodstream", as the other options tend to be a bit more bleak
Edit: they're talking about cancer "shedding genetic material", which I hate how general they're being. Probably talking about proto oncogenes from dead tumour debris, but seems different to what I was expecting
