Palpitating_Rattus t1_j8f6elu wrote
Reply to comment by myusernamehere1 in A study found that CBD "exerted anti-cancer activity by reducing epithelial-mesenchymal transition and causing cell cycle arrest." by OregonTripleBeam
Why is the bleach example a bad faith argument? I gave that as an example that promising in vitro results often fail to make it to the clinic. That statement is absolutely true.
You don't like bleach? Fine, if you put enough table salt into the dish, cancer cells die, but people who eat the same salt still get cancer all the time. Is that still a bad faith argument? Or how about the fact FCCP kills cancer cells in a dish but will likely also kill people if you give it to them?
In vitro research is important, but it should always be followed up by in vivo studies and clinical trials.
[deleted] t1_j8few5w wrote
[removed]
myusernamehere1 t1_j8ffa66 wrote
Believe it or not, cancer research is typically more advanced than just exposing cancer cells to caustic/toxic chemicals.
Palpitating_Rattus t1_j8fgxw8 wrote
>Believe it or not, cancer research is typically more advanced than just exposing cancer cells to caustic/toxic chemicals.
And how is this argument different from what I stated just prior?
> In vitro research is important, but it should always be followed up by in vivo studies and clinical trials.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments