TSA removing cancer machines? Really?

I haven't heard Mitt Romney say a single nary thing about eliminating the Department of Homeland Security and completely scrapping the Transportation Security Administration. That he hasn't and apparently approves of those governmental monstrosities is just one more reason why the Romney/Ryan ticket won't get my vote next month. Neither will Obama/Biden, but that's a post for next week.

But just in time for the election, The TSA is removing those cancer machines it euphemistically calls "body scanners" from major airports. The official line is that the cancer machines are being relocated to smaller airports in an effort to "speed things up" across the board.

But there are serious reasons to consider that rather than completely giving up on Nude-o-vision(tm), the TSA may in fact be gearing up to implement even WORSE technology: namely scanners with much finer resolution and stronger abilities at detecting small objects on a person (what objects those are is an exercise for the reader). In other words, the government-mandated radiation risk may not be going away at all and might be set to get worse.

(Many of us are still waiting for Janet Napolitano, the head of Homeland Security, to go through one of those machines herself. Alas! She adamantly refuses.)

In the meantime, the Transportation Security Administration thugs continue to sexually grope people with terminal cancer, strand U.S. citizens in Hawaii because of the nebulous and unconstitutional "no-fly list", steal iPads from passengers just for the hell of it, steal money from passengers because said passengers weren't "obedient" enough and complained about TSA abuse, refuse to allow passengers to board because of "bad attitude", and habitually grope and harass little children and elderly citizens.

Had enough of this crap, Mr. and Mrs. America? Is it gonna take getting tumors all over your body to say "enough"?

Read More

17-year old creates cancer-destroying nanoparticle (and wins lots of $$$ to boot!)

Angela Zhang (left) is probably like the vast majority of other teenagers in most respects. But how many other teens out there are also developing radical new therapies for cancer that might very well lead to a veritable cure?

That's what Zhang has been doing for the past two years, spending over a thousand hours researching and creating a microscopic means of destroying tumors. And for her efforts she has just been awarded the $100,000 Grand Prize in the Individual category of the Siemens Competition in Math, Science & Technology!

The title of Zhang's project is "Design of Image-guided, Photo-thermal Controlled Drug Releasing Multifunctional Nanosystem for the Treatment of Cancer Stem Cells". In layman's terms, it means that she developed a nanoparticle that, when delivered to the tumor site via the drug salinomycin, destroys the cancerous stem cells. Not only that but she smartly utilized gold and iron-oxide so that the particles could also be picked up on MRI and photoacoustics. Meaning that Zhang's method can overcome cancer resistance and be monitored in real time without any extra special equipment.

Clever lass, this one is!

Geek.com has more about Angela Zhang and her very cool work. Wouldn't surprise me if this product of her ingenuity sees routine use within the next ten years (if not sooner).

Read More

New hope for cancer patients: Drug chokes off energy to tumors

On the medical side of things, researchers at Ohio State University have hit upon a promising new lead in the fight against cancer: an experimental drug that kills cancerous cells by cutting off their supply of sugar.

From the article at the university's website...

Researchers at the Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center-Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute have designed an experimental drug that chokes off that sugar supply, causing the cells to self destruct.

The agent, called OSU-CG12, is an example of a new class of anticancer drugs called energy-restriction mimetic agents. It is described in a paper published recently in the Journal of Biological Chemistry.

"Energy restriction may offer a powerful new strategy for treating cancer because it targets a survival mechanism used by many types of cancer," says principal investigator Ching-Shih Chen, professor of medicinal chemistry, of internal medicine and of urology.

"Our study proves that this new agent kills cancer cells through energy restriction. This is important because it shows that it is possible to design drugs that target energy restriction, and it is exciting because energy-restricting mimetic agents may also be useful for other diseases, including metabolic syndromes, diabetes, cardiovascular disease and obesity," Chen adds.

Energy-restricting mimetic agents cause changes in cancer cells that are similar to those that occur in cancer cells deprived of their main energy source, the sugar glucose.

Plenty more info at the link above for those of you technically-minded, or otherwise have a strong interest in this sort of thing.

I tend to no longer be the sort that jumps headfirst with enthusiasm at news of this nature. But the fact is there's been lots of new research getting published lately from the realm of biochemistry holding the potential for great strides against cancer, with much of it having to do with selectively targeting cancerous cells while leaving the healthy tissue untouched.

The day that Lord willing we get to say that we have got cancer licked, I for one am going to go positivalutely bonkers with celebration. Mayhap that day not be too far off after all...

Read More

Is a gift of the Magi a cure for cancer?

Frankincense, the precious fragrance that was among the gifts that the wise men from the East brought to the infant Jesus, is now being studied intensely for its cancer-fighting properties. There's something in frankincense that compels cancerous cells to "reject" nuclei and reset back to what the normal governing gene sequence should be.

It's a very educational and intriguing read, especially if you've ever read the Christmas story out of the Bible and wondered what the heck frankincense is supposed to be :-)

(And although that painting has nothing to do with frankincense specifically, I'll give props to whoever can tell me the name of it, who painted it and what its historical significance is ;-)

Read More

Scientists crack entire genome of skin and lung cancer

Researchers working around the globe as part of the International Cancer Genome Consortium have announced that the entire genetic code for skin and lung cancer has been "decrypted".

The scientists have discovered more than 30,000 transcription errors in genetic replication that give rise to melanoma (and almost all of these are triggered from too much sunlight).

And if you're a smoker, think about this the next time you light up: you typically acquire one fresh new mutation for every 15 cigarettes that you smoke. Not all of these are malign, but there are more than 23,000 genetic errors and some of them will lead to lung cancer.

That's about, what... 1.25 mutations per pack of cigarettes, on the conservative side of the figures?

Yul Brynner was smoking five packs a day. This is what he had to say about it, in a 1985 television spot intentionally airing after he died...

The International Cancer Genome Consortium researchers are hailing their findings as a tremendous breakthrough in the fight against cancer. That it certainly is.

But folks, let's not pin too much hope on research. Take care of yourself so that you don't have to likely appreciate the fruits of future medicine.

Read More

Are there any consistent politicians left?

As I write this, Drudge Report has a red-colored link to a story about Governor Rick Perry of Texas vowing that he would assert that state's Tenth Amendment rights if he had to in order to oppose President Obama's plans to nationalize health care.

Hey, I'm all for that. I think every state should consider using that Tenth Amendment. But does Governor Perry seriously oppose Obama's mad medical plot on account of principle?

Because as recently as two and a half years ago Perry was very much for government-mandated medicine! It was in February of 2007 that he issued an executive order mandating that all girls entering the sixth grade be vaccinated against cervical cancer. The only vaccine available, Gardasil, is manufactured by Merck & Co.

And it soon turned out that Perry was more or less in Merck & Co.'s pocket, having received $6000 from the corporation's political action committee and that his former chief of staff was one of three registered lobbyists for Merck.

Ultimately the executive order was defeated by act of legislation, after a tremendous uproar from doctors, parents and others. Had it been enforced, that would have been all of Texas's young ladies having to get a shot at $120 each... with the money going to one of Perry's campaign contributors.

Rick Perry wanted to take a vital health care decision out of the province of families and their private practitioners, and hand it over to bureaucrats and government flunkies.

Sounds like Rick Perry was "for it before he was against it" when it comes to government-managed health care.

I am so damned sick and tired of these partisan #&@$ers who apparently have no virtues or principles that they aren't willing and able to sell out for the right price. And I mean both of the major parties that are dominating this country's politics.

How many elected officials in high office can I say that I respect? I'll only remark that I can number them all on one hand. And maybe only one of those is from my own home state of North Carolina.

It's not just a parliament of whores. It's a system-wide corruption.

So when the hell are we the people gonna stop falling for the "shuck and jive" of these bastitches and whip them all out of where they should have never been allowed in the first place?

Or to paraphrase that Nazi agent from Raiders of the Lost Ark: "Shoot them. Shoot them all!"

Read More

Cancer drug wipes out man's fingerprints

Rather bizarre story from WebMD.com...

Cancer Drug Erases Man's Fingerprints

Traveler Was Stopped at Border Because of a Side Effect of Xeloda
By Bill Hendrick
WebMD Health News
Reviewed by Louise Chang, MD

May 27, 2009 -- A 62-year-old Singapore man was temporarily denied entry into the U.S. because a cancer drug he was taking had made his fingerprints disappear, according to a letter published in the Annals of Oncology.

Eng-Huat Tan, MD, a senior consultant in the medical oncology department at Singapore's National Cancer Center, says his patient, identified as "Mr. S," had been taking the drug Xeloda since July 2005 to prevent recurrence of advanced cancer that had responded well to chemotherapy.

The cancer patient was detained by U.S. Customs officials for four hours in December 2008 because they could not detect fingerprints. The Customs officials later determined that the man was not a security threat.

Tan says people being treated with Xeloda, described as an oral chemotherapy drug, should carry a letter from their doctor that they are taking the medication if they want to travel to countries that require fingerprints for identification.

According to the letter in Annals of Oncology, other cancer patients taking the drug have reported similar side effects.

Foreign visitors have been asked to provide fingerprints at U.S. entry points for a number of years. The images are matched with millions of visa holders to detect whether the visitor has a visa under a different name; visitors' fingerprints are also compared to fingerprints of criminals, Tan says in the letter.

"Mr. S" did not know his fingerprints had disappeared, according to Tan.

Anyone else think that this drug will soon be in high demand among bank robbers and safe crackers? :-P

Read More

Down syndrome and how it fights cancer

This is why I love the Internet so much: you get to learn stuff you otherwise might never have known. And this is why I love blogging so much: it gives me the opportunity to share stuff like this with others who also might never have known it :-)

Apparently it's been recognized for awhile among those in the field that people with Down syndrome (a genetic affliction marked by an extra chromosome) very rarely get cancer. According to an article at Science News about a newly published study in the journal Nature, it may be because of extra production of a cancer-fighting protein in people with Down...

People born with Down syndrome have an extra copy of chromosome 21, instead of the usual two copies — one from each parent. The third chromosome causes genetic aberrations that result in the mental retardation and telltale physical traits that define the condition.

But chromosome 21 carries 231 genes, including some that may well suppress cancer. In the new study, researchers provide evidence that the protein encoded by the RCAN1 gene reins in the rampant blood vessel growth that a tumor needs to thrive. Scientists theorized that having an extra copy of the gene would result in more protein being made and add to an anticancer effect.

Scientists have long suspected that such genetic benefits might accrue from having an extra chromosome 21. A recent study found that people with Down syndrome are only about one-tenth as likely to get a solid-tumor cancer as are people without the syndrome.

There's plenty more of this intriguing study at the link above.

Read More

Implanted microchips may cause cancer

Many lab animals that have been given microchip implants have developed cancerous tumors, according to newly published research.

"The transponders were the cause of the tumors," said Keith Johnson, a retired toxicologic pathologist, explaining in a phone interview the findings of a 1996 study he led at the Dow Chemical Co. in Midland, Mich.

Leading cancer specialists reviewed the research for The Associated Press and, while cautioning that animal test results do not necessarily apply to humans, said the findings troubled them. Some said they would not allow family members to receive implants, and all urged further research before the glass-encased transponders are widely implanted in people.

I thought this was pretty fascinating, in light of how there's a push from several sectors to start putting these chips in humans. And since some people are associating these chips with the biblical "Mark of the Beast", it kinda makes you wonder about Revelation 16, verses 1 and 2...

Then I heard a loud voice from the temple saying to the seven angels, "Go, pour out the seven bowls of God's wrath on the earth." The first angel went and poured out his bowl on the land, and ugly and painful sores broke out on the people who had the mark of the beast and worshiped his image.

Whether you base your stance on religious belief or medical research or classic libertarianism, I think it's safe to say: putting these things in humans is a bad idea.

Read More