skraddleboop

skraddleboop OP t1_j3ieb7r wrote

Reply to comment by U-STAY-CLASSY in New Study Uncovers Potential Target for Stopping 90% of Cancer Deaths by skraddleboop

I've heard people say that too. "They won't cure cancer because it would cost the medical industry too much money." But my thinking is that if they are of such lack of moral character that they would put money over lives like that - they would solve cancer in a heartbeat and take the fame and money that would come from it, and not hold back for some big picture career protection of their fellow medical researchers' jobs.

2

skraddleboop OP t1_j3ibx22 wrote

Reply to comment by Colddigger in New Study Uncovers Potential Target for Stopping 90% of Cancer Deaths by skraddleboop

I was just listening to a podcast where this guy was mentioning how over the past 30 years, he's only been sick twice, once with a cold and the other time with COVID, where his symptoms were as mild as a cold. And he was mentioning how important it was to be hydrated. We've known for a long time that it is important to be hydrated, but maybe it's important in ways we didn't/don't fully understand yet.

3

skraddleboop OP t1_j3eh87o wrote

Reply to New Study Uncovers Potential Target for Stopping 90% of Cancer Deaths by skraddleboop

Submission statement:

According to a study published in Nature, an international teamof researchers has identified a mechanism that allows cancer cells tospread throughout the body. They found that cancer cells move fasterwhen they are surrounded by thicker fluids, a change that occurs whenlymph drainage is disrupted by a primary tumor.

These findings provide a potential new target for stopping metastasis, which is responsible for 90% of cancer deaths.“Thisis really the first time that the viscosity of the extracellular fluidhas been looked at in detail,” says John D. Lewis, professor and BirdDogs Chair in Translational Oncology at the University of Alberta’sFaculty of Medicine & Dentistry. “Now that we know that fluidviscosity signals cancer cells to move in a specific way, we canpotentially use drugs to basically short-circuit that signaling pathwayand encourage cancer cells to slow down, or even maybe to stop.

107

skraddleboop t1_j3dhczz wrote

Reply to comment by [deleted] in A biotech firm says the U.S. has approved its vaccine for honeybees by BorgesBorgesBorges60

There are people with sickening wealth and power who believe that the world needs to be "depopulated" because the Earth cannot sustain our species if it continues growing at its current rate. Some of them believe that stopping that growth is also insufficient, and they believe in measures which will cull out the herd - obviously won't affect those with the means to still buy whatever they need regardless of cost - but will cull out the herd. I don't mean to imply that those people are funding or are in any way connected to this "bee vaccine" initiative, but let's just say I wouldn't be surprised if the science backing it up is dubious.

1

skraddleboop t1_j33eeou wrote

Reply to The Expanding Dark Forest and Generative AI by Warriohuma

I dunno. I hate to be on the skeptical side of AI doom and gloom... since I actually think it is the biggest existential threat we face, even bigger than the CCP... but... it seems to me that as AI content proliferates, there will be content creators/hubs where people specifically disallow AI, and maybe even a company that vets and certifies that a particular site is using only human-generated content. Like a Twitter blue check mark that verifies that you're actually a celebrity. I don't think being lost in a world of AI content that tricks us into thinking it is human-generated content is the big threat from AI, i think extinction is.

2