Immune cells fighting cancer get exhausted within hours of encountering tumors
theconversation.com
theconversation.com
1. Surgically resected a tumor and removed the tumor attacking T cells in a lab,
2. expanded them in a lab to 130 billion,
3. returned them to me after making me immunosuppressed, and
4. kick started my new immune system with high-dose IL-2.
Within three months, my tumors were essentially gone.
I’ve been cancer-free since.
It seems to me that the body doesn’t have enough of the right T cells to fight the mutated, cancerous cells.
Training an elite team of cellular terminators is the next step when the local forces are just not adequate anymore. But it is still so expensive.
[1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S000649712...
The study I was part of was published in a few papers, including: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6295669/
We don't even know how these cells work when they are operating perfectly! I wish there was more funding for immunology outside of the context of cancer, but I find it reasonable that this isn't the case.
And this makes me think, will lab grown meat essentially be eating different types of animal cancers.
I dont think you have the right tools, the upgraded/improved tools, like xrays and fMRI all generate new insights and from those insights come new theories.
Which means superstitious miracles still happen because science cant explain it.
But, like they said, life find a way. BUT, the chances of eating lab meat and got cancer is probably lower than say, eating fried foods gives you cancer. So not an issue IMO. Breathing gives you cancer too
Anyone know? I'm sure its a business confidential media so I doubt it will be public knowledge which means I wont know if its got enough nutrition compared to traditionally organic grown meat or not. But sure its not aggressive at leeching nutrients from surrounding tissue like cancer.
In short, a dead switch to the cells once they are taken out of the special media to grow them.
The medical experts are still pushing folic acid and folates, and yet it becomes formaldehyde in the body, and formaldehyde was found in tobacco and thought to be one of the causes of lung cancer, and many mothers know the dangers of consuming too much folic acid during pregnancy, like impaired fetal growth, asthma and autism.
So can we really trust the experts including govts and the WHO?
But folic acid can keep anthrax at bay, so are smokers managing inhaled anthrax spores?
In my opinion, one of the reasons why covid was released on the planet was to stimulate interest and growth for the PCR tests. Its useful for detecting pathogens in the body.
They have been using PCR tests in the US to detect drug resistant nematodes (worms) in dogs for at least a decade now, and yet here in the UK, there appears to be nothing of the sort, according to Defra. Surprising how some first world countries appear so backwards in some areas. Not saying there are no pcr testing machines in the UK, just that there is no data for drug resistant nematodes in canines.
The UK govt handling of the infected blood scandal is another example of poor management. Rather than use a US test, they did nothing until a UK test was developed, allowing people to die from crack pot theories dreamt up by doctors.
So if you cant detect a pathogen, cancer or senescent cell in the body, how can it be treated?
Thats seems to be the crux of science.
I'm surprised they don't inject mercury into cancer tumours because mercury induces mitochondrial dysfunction and cancer cells do have mitochondria. But I dont want to sound too Trump-ist, even though its used in dental fillings and is particularly useful at killing syphilis.
And when looking at cancer leeching nutrients from surrounding tissue, how is that any different to bacteria? They also need nutrients which they take from the body and they can still kill people, as can the benzene ring, a known carcinogen, found in antibiotics, suggesting heavy antibiotic use can cause or contribute to cancer and yet are also used in medicine.
I find the history of cancer treatment in the US interesting, nicotinic acid aka sunburn effect vitamin B3 was the first chemo drug, dont know what the thinking was for using it, maybe it was the dna rebinding effect it has, or maybe the prostaglandin stimulation that was thought to be useful.
But in the absence of explanations, I'm not inspired by the medical profession.
https://www2.mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk/folate-and-formaldehyde-from-...
Like the cancer state is more than just an error, its a protection mechanism.
Since cancer treatments never address the root cause of whats turning cells cancerous, only mitigating the presence and affects of how many cancerous ones there are.
Right now, the additional state happens in too few survivors for anyone to notice. Like maybe the additional state its just as rare to further progress, and cancer often results in death.
There doesn't have to be a meaning, I just wonder if there is and if it could change the approach to improve protecting the host and ensuring survival.
So all in all, it's just a matter of time until you get unlucky, something goes wrong and you have a cancer.