Chemotherapy drug reaches brain tumors using novel ultrasound technology
news.northwestern.edu
news.northwestern.edu
It seems we use ultrasound, for example on every baby, and don't have good data to prove that there are no side effects.
Yet research like this shows that there clearly are biological effects of sufficiently powerful ultrasound.
What if societies lack of future Einstein's is down to blasting the brains of all of them with ultrasound pre-birth?
This article first appeared in 'Midwifery Today' Issue 80, Winter 2006:
"Questions about Prenatal Ultrasound and the Alarming Increase in Autism"
https://web.archive.org/web/20070129125421/http://midwiferyt...
https://fluidsbarrierscns.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186...
I would speculate that other areas of the body haven't developed similar protections because their structures are not as vulnerable to stuff that's floating around in your bloodstream.
is that known?
I'm honestly not trying to pick a fight, but could you clarify what that question means?
https://www.npr.org/2008/05/13/90411533/study-ultrasound-boo...
That said, the clinical trial is for the combination of a drug treatment + implantable device. The implantable device itself (Sonocloud 9) has been granted fast track status by the FDA (https://www.fusfoundation.org/posts/cartheras-sonocloud-9-sy...). The fast track status should help speed up how quickly the FDA authorizes the overall treatment once clinical trials are complete.
So... completely pulling a number out of my butt, probably 5-7 years.
Sometimes I wonder if we are erring too much on the side of slowing things down.
But in saying that, if a trial is showing very positive results then it can be fast tracked, as it is unethical to withhold that kind of treatment. Conversely, plenty of trials that look good in phase I/II fail in phase III and are terminated early.
While we're all desperate (some more than others) for a break-through in cancer treatment, it seems perfectly reasonable to demonstrate that something is both safe and better than the current standard-of-care before physicians start rolling this out to everyone affected by the brain tumours this therapy would help.
I sympathize with the sentiment that delaying rolling out a therapy like this seems inhumane, it would be no less (and arguably more) inhumane to roll out a therapy where we didn't establish safe doses and effectiveness to the best of our ability. Both potentially result in deaths.
Nominative determinism strikes again.
“Nominative determinism is the hypothesis that people tend to gravitate towards areas of work that fit their names.”
I would assume the original name would be captured on a university convocation program PDF within the last decade or two.
In all seriousness, though, is there really such a thing as "the cancer"? Probably not.
Our current methods of treating it treat it in a piecemeal fashion, targeting one variation or another, but I don't think it's unthinkable that you could managed to target and fix the entire set.
This is why we deal with it piecemeal, because it's the only way we can actually detect it. This isn't a current technical limitation, this is a "we can't solve something before we know the problem" issue due to how cells work. Even in the very long term future where we have bio implants, the best solution we would have are implants being able to seek cancer cells instantly and remove them.
Suppose scanning technology progresses to the point where we can quickly resolve every cell in the human body. Suppose computing technology progresses to the point where we can quickly interpret that scan data and identify which areas are normal and which areas are tumorous growths that shouldn't exist. Suppose surgical(/point application of energy) technology progresses to the point where we can destroy any individual cell without collateral damage.
I believe at that point we could solve the entire set of conditions called cancer (but maybe not all disease, maybe some forms of dementia still evade us for instance).
I'm not criticizing the current approach by calling it piecemeal. It's what we know how to do, doing it saves lives, of course we should do it. I'm just saying that cancer is a meaningfully label, and it's conceivable that at some point we can solve it, all of it.