18 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
18 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

Massive blast of measles vaccine wipes out cancer, research suggests

by Kurt
13 replies
  • OFF TOPIC
    • |
"Minnesota woman injected with enough measles vaccine to inoculate 10 million people sees blood cancer go into remission, Mayo Clinic says."

Massive blast of measles vaccine wipes out cancer, research suggests | Toronto Star
  • Profile picture of the author tagiscom
    That's, pretty good, but l hope that they don't put a sell your house to use it price tag on it?


    Shane
    Signature
    Archimedes Forum, Sign up l won't bite
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9194301].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author seasoned
      Originally Posted by tagiscom View Post

      That's, pretty good, but l hope that they don't put a sell your house to use it price tag on it?


      Shane
      Well, in the US, I THINK it is often free, so the public would probably balk at a cost of over say $1000. You can BET that there will be an increased cost out of convenience, shortages,and possibly government red tape. The most expensive shot ***I*** have heard of to date apparently costs in the tens of thousands, but it is a genetically engineered shot made privately for a small group of people.

      I wonder how they found out. Does this mean that people that got the measles won't get cancer?

      Steve
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9194687].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Claude Whitacre
        The science sounds reasonable. But I've read thousands of these stories.

        A trial of 2 people?

        I hope the cancer doesn't return. This is so preliminary.
        Signature
        One Call Closing book https://www.amazon.com/One-Call-Clos...=1527788418&sr

        What if they're not stars? What if they are holes poked in the top of a container so we can breath?
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9195115].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Kurt
          Originally Posted by Claude Whitacre View Post

          The science sounds reasonable. But I've read thousands of these stories.

          A trial of 2 people?

          I hope the cancer doesn't return. This is so preliminary.
          The article mentions that this technique has been successful in mice. And yes, it is preliminary and two cases doesn't mean it's automatically a cure. But you have to start somewhere and I don't think it would be wise to start testing something like this on the masses without first testing on a very small sample.

          I think it is signifigant that it is a reputable research facility, the Mayo Clinic, that did the research.

          It does offer hope and an interesting new theory to learn about and explore further. While this exact process may not be the answer, it could be part of the answer.
          Signature
          Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
          Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9195134].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author blueclcl
    Interesting story.. Unfortunately the cost will probably rise through the roof to get it! Billion pound industry that I struggle to agree with - Surely a cure for illness should be affordable, but very rarely is.
    Signature
    Free cheat sheet for getting your first paying writing client on Upwork within 7 days - Learn More [/B]
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9194358].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author HeySal
    2 people in the experiment and 1 in remission. 50%.

    It would be very interesting to know how they thought this one up? I'm sure they didn't just one day say, "hey, lets see if we shoot this chick up with enough vacine for 10 million people and see what it does".
    Signature

    Sal
    When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
    Beyond the Path

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9194657].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author bizgrower
    Interesting research method.

    The article states they wish they would have
    been able to give the second patient more.

    Maybe they will be able to further isolate
    whatever it is in the vaccine.

    The article did not mention side effects.

    Dan
    Signature

    "If you think you're the smartest person in the room, then you're probably in the wrong room."

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9195309].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author seasoned
      Originally Posted by bizgrower View Post

      Interesting research method.

      The article states they wish they would have
      been able to give the second patient more.

      Maybe they will be able to further isolate
      whatever it is in the vaccine.

      The article did not mention side effects.

      Dan
      Generally, Vaccines just contain a MINISCULE amount of weakened or dead virus. So the chances of IT doing anything is very unlikely. The intent is to get the BODY'S responses to attack something similar in some way, which is usually the virus. In over two centuries, of understanding that, they still don't understand it at the level you seem to want, and it is unlikely they will anytime soon. That is why they keep trying vaccines with identical viruses, etc... The common cold varies too quickly, so they have effectively abandoned curing THAT. HIV is almost as bad, so....

      Some protein chain that is on/in the cancer must seem similar enough to the measles, that it simply goes after it. Of course, Cancer DOES work VERY similar to a virus. Who is to say? Science HAS been working on that KIND of technology for a long time, likening it to a magic or silver bullet. They have often settled for something to be absorbed by the target cells to target chemotherapy.

      Of course 2 people ISN'T the best study. It would be better to have thousands.

      Steve
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9195333].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author bizgrower
        Originally Posted by seasoned View Post

        Generally, Vaccines just contain a MINISCULE amount of weakened or dead virus. So the chances of IT doing anything is very unlikely. The intent is to get the BODY'S responses to attack something similar in some way, which is usually the virus. In over two centuries, of understanding that, they still don't understand it at the level you seem to want, and it is unlikely they will anytime soon. That is why they keep trying vaccines with identical viruses, etc... The common cold varies too quickly, so they have effectively abandoned curing THAT. HIV is almost as bad, so....

        Some protein chain that is on/in the cancer must seem similar enough to the measles, that it simply goes after it. Of course, Cancer DOES work VERY similar to a virus. Who is to say? Science HAS been working on that KIND of technology for a long time, likening it to a magic or silver bullet. They have often settled for something to be absorbed by the target cells to target chemotherapy.

        Of course 2 people ISN'T the best study. It would be better to have thousands.

        Steve
        Yeah, I was thinking if they did not have use such massive dosage,
        then cost could come down and more people could have access....
        Signature

        "If you think you're the smartest person in the room, then you're probably in the wrong room."

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9195407].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author seasoned
          Originally Posted by bizgrower View Post

          Yeah, I was thinking if they did not have use such massive dosage,
          then cost could come down and more people could have access....
          They make TONS of the stuff. The US is literally GIVING it away WORLD WIDE! But the FDA BUTS OUT, etc... Ifit is used for cancer, the FDA will likely get into the act, and the government, etc....

          Steve
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9195415].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author AprilCT
            Now we wait to see what kind of effect this massive does has on the human body besides kicking cancer. A dose big enough for ten million people sounds truly bizarre.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9195575].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author seasoned
              Originally Posted by AprilCT View Post

              Now we wait to see what kind of effect this massive does has on the human body besides kicking cancer. A dose big enough for ten million people sounds truly bizarre.
              WOW! I didn't read it. 10 million IS bizarre. That CAN'T be in one dose! Obviously, it IS highly diluted and, to keep costs down, they probably don't have any more than you need, which may be TINY! So THOUSANDS of times in a dose may not be too bad, but MILLIONS? Is that even POSSIBLE in ONE shot?

              Steve
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9195724].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author HeySal
          Originally Posted by bizgrower View Post

          Yeah, I was thinking if they did not have use such massive dosage,
          then cost could come down and more people could have access....
          They've had cures for over 50 years now. They've been suppressed because they kill the cancer off and they want it to be chronic so you have to continue to pay to keep it in remission. I won't trust any of their crap until they allow the stuff proven 100% to be used and just skip the tens of billions in profits.

          If this works and works the way they want it to, people will pay through the nose for it - and they will pay periodically, not just once.
          Signature

          Sal
          When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
          Beyond the Path

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9195696].message }}

Trending Topics