Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5648|London, England
I think this is really cool.

U.S. scientists developed a vaccine that could prevent breast cancer and save the lives of millions of women, Sky News reported Monday.

The treatment was tested on mice and showed "overwhelmingly favorable results.”

Dr. Vincent Tuohy, who led the research at the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio, said there was evidence in the initial tests that the vaccine could prevent cancers from forming and stop the growth of existing tumors.

"If it works in humans the way it works in mice, this will be monumental," he said.

"We could eliminate breast cancer. We believe that this vaccine will someday be used to prevent breast cancer in adult women in the same way that vaccines have prevented many childhood diseases."

Researchers injected the test vaccine into six mice that were specifically bred to be prone to breast cancer. None developed any signs of tumors.

A further six mice bred in the same way were injected with a placebo vaccine and all developed tumors.

The drug makes the immune system attack a particular protein found in most breast cancer cells and in the mammary tissues of breastfeeding women.

If clinical tests of the vaccine on humans are successful, women over 40 could be vaccinated against the disease. At that age, breast cancer risk begins to increase and women are less likely to be breastfeeding.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,593 … latestnews

I love reading stuff like this. Not really debate worthy but it is serious talk
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
=NHB=Shadow
hi
+322|6656|California
no more I <3 boobies wristbands? or shirts?
SenorToenails
Veritas et Scientia
+444|6420|North Tonawanda, NY
That's cool and all, but let's wait for the primate/human test results.  Murine studies are very different from human studies.
Hurricane2k9
Pendulous Sweaty Balls
+1,538|5992|College Park, MD
Won't happen, Big Pharma would rather capitalize on selling treatments to cancer victims for many many years instead of preventing cancer from ever happening.

Then again, Big Insurance probably wouldn't mind this preventive treatment which would greatly reduce how much money they pay out for treatments, especially now that there won't be lifetime caps (if I recall correctly).

FIGHT!
https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/36793/marylandsig.jpg
Jaekus
I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose
+957|5468|Sydney
Of course it will happen. If one big pharmacy simply wants to make cash from treatment, another will want to undercut their business by getting in first with a vaccine.

I'm not very scientifically minded at all but could this be considered a big breakthrough in cancer treatment and prevention in general? (assuming it has the high success rate on humans that they're hoping for) It would be great to think that this could be a precursor to other cancer prevention, like prostate cancer.
Mitch
16 more years
+877|6815|South Florida

SenorToenails wrote:

That's cool and all, but let's wait for the primate/human test results.  Murine studies are very different from human studies.
mice are closer to humans than primates if i recall
15 more years! 15 more years!
Mitch
16 more years
+877|6815|South Florida
https://blogs.bet.com/news/newsyoushouldknow/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/i_am_legend_will_smith__1_.jpg
15 more years! 15 more years!
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5648|London, England

Mitch wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

That's cool and all, but let's wait for the primate/human test results.  Murine studies are very different from human studies.
mice are closer to humans than primates if i recall
Really?

Welcome to my list.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
Reciprocity
Member
+721|6871|the dank(super) side of Oregon
anything to preserve and protect mammaries, large and small, young and old, gets my full support.
13urnzz
Banned
+5,830|6787

Reciprocity wrote:

anything to preserve and protect mammaries, large and small, young and old, gets my full support.
good one, bra
Mitch
16 more years
+877|6815|South Florida

JohnG@lt wrote:

Mitch wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

That's cool and all, but let's wait for the primate/human test results.  Murine studies are very different from human studies.
mice are closer to humans than primates if i recall
Really?

Welcome to my list.
in the sense of medical studies and dna or something. idk
15 more years! 15 more years!
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5648|London, England

Mitch wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Mitch wrote:


mice are closer to humans than primates if i recall
Really?

Welcome to my list.
in the sense of medical studies and dna or something. idk
You really should've gone to a real school. Homeschooling didn't work out for you.

"Research by Mary-Claire King in 1973 found 99% identical DNA  between human beings and chimpanzees"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimpanzee
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
nlsme1
Member
+32|5707

Mitch wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Mitch wrote:


mice are closer to humans than primates if i recall
Really?

Welcome to my list.
in the sense of medical studies and dna or something. idk
Considering humans ARE primates. NO. See how easy it is G@LT. It is called debating.
nlsme1
Member
+32|5707

JohnG@lt wrote:

Mitch wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:


Really?

Welcome to my list.
in the sense of medical studies and dna or something. idk
You really should've gone to a real school. Homeschooling didn't work out for you.

"Research by Mary-Claire King in 1973 found 99% identical DNA  between human beings and chimpanzees"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimpanzee
Thats better, though you could do without the personal attacks.
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5876

nlsme1 wrote:

Mitch wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:


Really?

Welcome to my list.
in the sense of medical studies and dna or something. idk
Considering humans ARE primates. NO. See how easy it is G@LT. It is called debating.
Galt is an Übermensch.
Hurricane2k9
Pendulous Sweaty Balls
+1,538|5992|College Park, MD
I actually remember hearing something about how mice are very similar to humans which is why they're used for tests, although I never heard of them being more similar than apes.
https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/36793/marylandsig.jpg
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5648|London, England

Hurricane2k9 wrote:

I actually remember hearing something about how mice are very similar to humans which is why they're used for tests, although I never heard of them being more similar than apes.
Mice are common experimental animals in biology and psychology; primarily because they are mammals, are relatively easy to maintain and handle, reproduce quickly, and share a high degree of homology with humans. The mouse genome has been sequenced, and many mouse genes have human homologues.

In addition to being small, relatively inexpensive, and easily maintained, there are further benefits to the use of mice in laboratory research. Because mice can reproduce quickly, several generations of mice can be observed in a relatively short period of time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lab_mice#Mice_and_humans
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
Hurricane2k9
Pendulous Sweaty Balls
+1,538|5992|College Park, MD

JohnG@lt wrote:

Hurricane2k9 wrote:

I actually remember hearing something about how mice are very similar to humans which is why they're used for tests, although I never heard of them being more similar than apes.
Mice are common experimental animals in biology and psychology; primarily because they are mammals, are relatively easy to maintain and handle, reproduce quickly, and share a high degree of homology with humans. The mouse genome has been sequenced, and many mouse genes have human homologues.

In addition to being small, relatively inexpensive, and easily maintained, there are further benefits to the use of mice in laboratory research. Because mice can reproduce quickly, several generations of mice can be observed in a relatively short period of time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lab_mice#Mice_and_humans
Informative information bro
https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/36793/marylandsig.jpg
Harmor
Error_Name_Not_Found
+605|6839|San Diego, CA, USA
Who paid for the research?
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6965|Canberra, AUS

Harmor wrote:

Who paid for the research?
Why does it matter?

---

Can anyone find the actual paper?

Last edited by Spark (2010-06-02 02:01:43)

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
globefish23
sophisticated slacker
+334|6614|Graz, Austria
Lab mice simply have the better cost-benefit ratio than chimpanzees.

While testing on primates is much more logical an accurate, it's just to elaborate for big studies.
You can breed mice in a few weeks and get a load of babies in each brood.

Also, there are a shit load of differently genetically modified mouse breeds for every specific task.
Like in this case, mice that are more prone to get cancer/tumors.
(Would make no sense to breed the healthy wild type and wait for the occasional cancer patient.)

If you would try to make big studies with thousands of test animals, maybe even genetically modified ones, with primates, you would (a) need years, (b) need much more infrastructure to house all the apes and (c) get bashed by the ethic commissions and/or animal right activists.
globefish23
sophisticated slacker
+334|6614|Graz, Austria

Spark wrote:

Can anyone find the actual paper?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20512124
http://www.nature.com/nm/journal/vaop/n … .2161.html

Epub ahead of printing though.
Also, you need a subscription to read more than the abstract.
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6965|Canberra, AUS
Awww.

I wish all scientific journals were public domain... I know there are problems with that though.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
SenorToenails
Veritas et Scientia
+444|6420|North Tonawanda, NY

globefish23 wrote:

Lab mice simply have the better cost-benefit ratio than chimpanzees.

While testing on primates is much more logical an accurate, it's just to elaborate for big studies.
You can breed mice in a few weeks and get a load of babies in each brood.

Also, there are a shit load of differently genetically modified mouse breeds for every specific task.
Like in this case, mice that are more prone to get cancer/tumors.
(Would make no sense to breed the healthy wild type and wait for the occasional cancer patient.)

If you would try to make big studies with thousands of test animals, maybe even genetically modified ones, with primates, you would (a) need years, (b) need much more infrastructure to house all the apes and (c) get bashed by the ethic commissions and/or animal right activists.
And the costs would be absolutely crushing.

Mice are great for research because of the reasons mentioned above, but there ARE significant differences between mice and humans, which is why there are testing phases on primates and humans after enough research is done on mice.  Mice aren't good enough alone.
nlsme1
Member
+32|5707
You know how much some medications go for. The costs are crushing. But they are passed on down the line.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard