HIV Virus Used To Cure Cancer

[Zulu]

Just to recap, my point in comment in this thread has more to do with the possibilities of research gone wrong in unforeseen ways. The use of HIV as a tool to take control of a patient's immune system and then turn it on against a patient's cancer. . . . knowing or believing HIV to a rapidly-adapting/changing virus. . . a retrovirus at that. . . .is not my idea of a "safe" method.

This all day long!!!

[One Brow]

Saying "cancer" is a whole bunch of tissue-specific diseases is like saying highly accelerated lead causes thousands of injuries. . . . depending on impact site.

Lead poisoning is the same regardless of impact site. My understadning is that metastasized lung cancers (there are more than one type) are still different from metstasized bone cancers (again, more than one type). They respond differently to different chemotherapeutic agents, etc. From what I have rad, use the wrong chmo drugs on a cancer is close to useless, and probably malpractice.

[babe]

Lead poisoning is the same regardless of impact site. My understadning is that metastasized lung cancers (there are more than one type) are still different from metstasized bone cancers (again, more than one type). They respond differently to different chemotherapeutic agents, etc. From what I have rad, use the wrong chmo drugs on a cancer is close to useless, and probably malpractice.

words often leave a lot to be desired in translation. . . .

A .45 slug with velocity 1200 fps from the side, impacting just above the ear, will have doctors scrambling with a whole different point of view than a .22 from the front, through the earlobe.

So each tissue type has a fairly discrete set of receptors, and it's own natural growth patterns, and there are a lot of chemo agents with widely varying transport and absorption characteristics, and modes of action once assimilatied. . . . and produce and release somewhat varying mediators that produce cancers elsewhere in somewhat varying ways. . . .

But it is my point that chemo drugs generally attempt to kill cells with some hoped-for predilection for the rapidly-dividing cells. . . . . and are dosed to come close to lethality for the whole tissue. . . . and just smacks to me like the old "magic bullet" strategy all the same. . . .

[Scat]

words often leave a lot to be desired in translation. . . .

A .45 slug with velocity 1200 fps from the side, impacting just above the ear, will have doctors scrambling with a whole different point of view than a .22 from the front, through the earlobe.

So each tissue type has a fairly discrete set of receptors, and it's own natural growth patterns, and there are a lot of chemo agents with widely varying transport and absorption characteristics, and modes of action once assimilatied. . . . and produce and release somewhat varying mediators that produce cancers elsewhere in somewhat varying ways. . . .

But it is my point that chemo drugs generally attempt to kill cells with some hoped-for predilection for the rapidly-dividing cells. . . . . and are dosed to come close to lethality for the whole tissue. . . . and just smacks to me like the old "magic bullet" strategy all the same. . . .

LOL I think OB missed the meaning of the term "highly accelerated lead"

The severity of "sudden deceleration syndrome" is dependent on the rate of travel when sudden deceleration occurs.

[One Brow]

But it is my point that chemo drugs generally attempt to kill cells with some hoped-for predilection for the rapidly-dividing cells. . . . . and are dosed to come close to lethality for the whole tissue. . . . and just smacks to me like the old "magic bullet" strategy all the same. . . .

I agree that indiscriminate chemo would act much in the way you describe.