Cancer “Vaccine” Eliminates Tumors in Mice

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,003
In what some are calling a breakthrough, researchers at Stanford University found that 87 of 90 mice were cured of cancer after their solid tumors were injected with immune-stimulating agents. These injections caused the tumors to regress, eliminating even distant metastases.

The approach works for many different types of cancers, including those that arise spontaneously. The researchers said they believe the local application of very small amounts of vaccine could serve as a rapid and relatively inexpensive cancer therapy that is unlikely to cause the adverse side effects often seen with common treatments like chemotherapy and radiation.
 

Zuul

Gawd
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Messages
850
Sadly there will be a huge number of cancer patients in the near future because of the shit we are eating even though most of us know that most common foods are fucking poison.

I know first hand what is being mixed in to bread for instance because I worked in the additive industry for a whopping 32h (4 shifts) before I said fuck no to that bullshit. I'm not going to participate in fucking ppl overthe most basic of human needs. BUT this is good news...really good. People in the west aren't going to change their ways or habits so this is going to be needed badly and soon. Real soon.


edit: And because I live in a civilized part of the globe, if/when I get cancer it's not going to cost me anything.
 

Krenum

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 29, 2005
Messages
18,626
Sadly there will be a huge number of cancer patients in the near future because of the shit we are eating even though most of us know that most common foods are fucking poison.

Cancer can be caused by anything really. All it is , is abnormal cell growth. Its not a virus or a bacterium. You cannot vaccinate it ,only treat it.

When these scientists treat it that way, they are opening pandoras box.
 

Zuul

Gawd
Joined
Jan 7, 2013
Messages
850
Cancer can be caused by anything really. All it is , is abnormal cell growth. You cannot vaccinate it, only treat it.
Yes sure, I'm talking about something that people in the cities have a hard time avoiding and that is shitty food products (It's cheap). If you grow your own food you know what you're eating.

People can avoid places like Pripyat or even cosmic radiation to an extent, or places where the ground water has been poisoned or choose not live under high voltage power lines.

Shit now that I think about it, most people are fucking stupid so they wouldn't even know nor care about what they stuff down their throats. I'm with the "I know...but it's so tasty" crowd ;)

edit: maybe genetics have a large role to play in this. Some people smoke for 15 years and die in lung cance, others smoke until they are 95 and die of an heart attack.

And then there are people that live in grotesquely polluted cities in China that have nowhere to go. It sucks.

But you're absolutely correct. You can get cancer from fucking everything that's why we need this badly
 
Last edited:

cyberguyz

Gawd
Joined
Aug 28, 2014
Messages
710
If it is inexpensive I doubt it will see the light of day. The big pharma lobbyists will make sure that cheap solutions to cancer never happen while they are making buttloads of money from chemo and traditional cancer treatments. If there is no big profit in it, they will make sure the FDA never approves it.,
 

SamuraiInBlack

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 10, 2003
Messages
5,749
Cancer runs hard on both sides of my family. I'd punch a small defenseless animal for a vaccine against cancer. Hell, if I get cancer, where do I sign up to be a human test subject? If I'm dying anyway, I may as well at least donate what i have left to science. The worst that can happen is I become a real life Deadpool.
 

xrealm20

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
1,202
Cancer runs hard on both sides of my family. I'd punch a small defenseless animal for a vaccine against cancer. Hell, if I get cancer, where do I sign up to be a human test subject? If I'm dying anyway, I may as well at least donate what i have left to science. The worst that can happen is I become a real life Deadpool.

I 1000% agree with this... After watching friends and family die of cancer / complications from cancer, I really hope that this proves useful in human cases as well. It's about time we figured out a way to end this shit.
 
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
634
I think they said they were going to have trials on patients that had lymphoma, if I had lymphoma and the conventional treatments had a high success rate I think id stick with those.
 

sirmonkey1985

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010
Joined
Sep 13, 2008
Messages
22,230
Cancer runs hard on both sides of my family. I'd punch a small defenseless animal for a vaccine against cancer. Hell, if I get cancer, where do I sign up to be a human test subject? If I'm dying anyway, I may as well at least donate what i have left to science. The worst that can happen is I become a real life Deadpool.

just make sure you don't end up being the other 50% that gets the plecebo.. that's what happened to my aunts dad who had parkinsons or what ever it is when he signed up for an experimental treatment.. was one of the worst things she had to deal with knowing he wasn't actually getting the real medication but he thought he was.
 

Mazzspeed

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
3,025
After watching two people succumb to cancer, one of them being my father at far too young an age - God I hope this is the real deal....

Cancer sucks.
 

Gorankar

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 19, 2000
Messages
10,865
So we might be able to actually say, "fuck cancer", for real now?
 

atp1916

[H]ard|DCoTM x1
Joined
Jun 18, 2004
Messages
4,824
One can only hope it comes soon enough for as many people as possible to benefit.

103361737-RTX25FRR.jpg
 

Gabriel2

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 10, 2016
Messages
134
It will probably be too expensive to get this vaccine, at least in the U.S.
 

seanreisk

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
1,711
View attachment 52837

The Martin Shkreli situation angered and confused me. I'm a fiscal conservative / social libertarian, and I like to believe that there is always a simple and elegant solution to areas where morality and legality collide. And I spent a lot of time thinking about Martin Shkreli, and I thought it was hopeless, but now I think I've found something.

Mr. Shkreli should be allowed to charge people whatever he wants for his medicines, but because he is charging such an outrageous amount, anyone who can't afford his medicine should be allowed to beat the holy shit out of Mr. Shkreli with no repercussions. And if the person doesn't want to beat the holy shit out of Martin Shkreli, but would rather have Mr. Shkreli's medicine, that person should be able to sell their right of unholy-ass-beating-of-Mr.-Shkreli to any other person who does have the money for the medicine and would enjoy pounding a new mudhole in Mr. Shkreli's ass.

It is simple ideas like this that I believe would foster a responsible society.
 
Last edited:

rudy

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 4, 2004
Messages
8,704
Cancer can be caused by anything really. All it is , is abnormal cell growth. Its not a virus or a bacterium. You cannot vaccinate it ,only treat it.

When these scientists treat it that way, they are opening pandoras box.

Cancer is kept under control by a normal healthy adult by the immune system. You can absolutely make cancer vaccines there is at least one on the market already. Cancer gets out of control when cancerous cells are not being properly handled by the immune system for a variety of reasons. While I understand your lay view of this cause worry, to a person who has cancer, even if Pandora's box is opened it might be worth the risk. To put that in simple terms, die very soon to cancer, or die later to an autoimmune disease? Many people will pick later. But that statement only covers the worst case scenario, we have the FDA to vet these things and many cases will be better than the worst case scenario.
 

NeoNemesis

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 10, 2004
Messages
2,466
Cancer can be caused by anything really. All it is , is abnormal cell growth. Its not a virus or a bacterium. You cannot vaccinate it ,only treat it.

When these scientists treat it that way, they are opening pandoras box.

How so? My understanding is that this vaccine simply tells the immune system to kill the cancer cells (which it SHOULD already be doing). It isn't like they're splicing people with naked mole rat DNA.
 

Private_Ops

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
1,870
If it is inexpensive I doubt it will see the light of day. The big pharma lobbyists will make sure that cheap solutions to cancer never happen while they are making buttloads of money from chemo and traditional cancer treatments. If there is no big profit in it, they will make sure the FDA never approves it.,

Came here to say this. Yea, no one wants to here it but, there are some very greedy, very powerful people in the med/pharm industry that will keep something like this out of the hands of anyone who isn't in the 1%.

Of course, I would LOVE to be proved wrong.
 

Krenum

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 29, 2005
Messages
18,626
How so? My understanding is that this vaccine simply tells the immune system to kill the cancer cells (which it SHOULD already be doing). It isn't like they're splicing people with naked mole rat DNA.


I just worry that there are things their not telling us, like refuring to the vaccine as "agents" what kind of agents? Maybe I've watched too many SciFi movies.

But I do see hope in it, and if it actually works and helps saves people than that would be extraordinary.
 

TrailRunner

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 15, 2012
Messages
413
View attachment 52837

The Martin Shkreli situation angered and confused me. I'm a fiscal conservative / social libertarian, and I like to believe that there is always a simple and elegant solution to areas where morality and legality collide. And I spent a lot of time thinking about Martin Shkreli, and I thought it was hopeless, but now I think I've found something.

Mr. Shkreli should be allowed to charge people whatever he wants for his medicines, but because he is charging such an outrageous amount, anyone who can't afford his medicine should be allowed to beat the holy shit out of Mr. Shkreli with no repercussions. And if the person doesn't want to beat the holy shit out of Martin Shkreli, but would rather have Mr. Shkreli's medicine, that person should be able to sell their right of unholy-ass-beating-of-Mr.-Shkreli to any other person who does have the money for the medicine and would enjoy pounding a new mudhole in Mr. Shkreli's ass.

It is simple ideas like this that I believe would foster a responsible society.

The problem is the patents on these things. Firstly, the patent gives a legal monopoly so that a company can charge far above and beyond the cost to produce plus cost to research. Also, and this is especially pertinent to the Shkreli situation, it raises incentive to jack up prices outrageously shortly before the patent expires.

Beyond the pricing situation, another benefit to killing off patents is that, hypothetically, if there really was a cancer-curing wonderdrug, it would be less likely to be buried since companies wouldn't be able to profit as heavily on maintenance drugs.

The only downside is that without that guaranteed monopoly, there's no certainty that pharmaceutical companies would invest as much research on new drugs since any new development that they did could be used by any other company that just copied their finished product.
 

mope54

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
7,443
just make sure you don't end up being the other 50% that gets the plecebo.. that's what happened to my aunts dad who had parkinsons or what ever it is when he signed up for an experimental treatment.. was one of the worst things she had to deal with knowing he wasn't actually getting the real medication but he thought he was.
That's not how clinical trials for experimental drugs work. If your aunt told you that her dad was in a placebo group she was basing that on belief rather than facts.

Control groups are randomized and, in a double blind study, neither the patients nor the treatment staff know who are receiving placebo.
Medical information is protected and there's no possible way for your aunt to find out on her own what kinds of treatments her dad was or wasn't receiving.
In experimental drug testing when a placebo group is used, the study design allows for crossover for various reasons: treatment to all participants after a set period of time or once a patient starts to deteriorate rapidly
Keep in mind that these kinds of testing are only offered to patients who have not responded to all other traditional forms of treatment.

The sad fact of the matter is her dad was non-responsive to traditional treatments and the experimental treatment.
Loved ones really want to believe a cure exists and experimental trials provide a shimmer of hope for these family members (even after a terminal patient has already come to terms with the prognosis) and when a cure doesn't materialize *that* is very hard. Sometimes dealing with that trauma entails placing blame where it might not belong, such as, believing someone didn't really get all the treatment they could have gotten.
 

KD5ZXG

Gawd
Joined
Mar 24, 2017
Messages
698
Local vet saws the lumps off my rats for $80, and 2/3 the time that solves it.
Other 1/3 ain't usually the lump comes back, but the wound gets infected
cause they won't leave it alone. Course you gotta get it done before it gets
to be a golfball, or spreads... All fem rats get mamolumpage it if they live
long enough (bout 1.5yr out of a 2yr life), but my vet finally convinced me
the current batch should be male. Fighting is better than lumps. Male rat
fights break out frequently, like every day. But its playful, and injuries rare.
Nowhere near vicious as when girls take a sudden unprovoked dislike to
each other. When will they have a vaccine for that?
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 133315

Guest
In what some are calling a breakthrough, researchers at Stanford University found that 87 of 90 mice were cured of cancer after their solid tumors were injected with immune-stimulating agents. These injections caused the tumors to regress, eliminating even distant metastases.

The approach works for many different types of cancers, including those that arise spontaneously. The researchers said they believe the local application of very small amounts of vaccine could serve as a rapid and relatively inexpensive cancer therapy that is unlikely to cause the adverse side effects often seen with common treatments like chemotherapy and radiation.

Thats been in the news for a good while, maybe not this particular trial, but over here their has been similar news about cancer vaccines that cure x % of x type of cancer in mice/monkeys/banned forums members.

This trial came too late to save angelina jolies tits, no wonder brad left her and Colonel Kurtz in apocalypse now describes her beautifully.

“The horror, the horror”

The b52 arclight strike at the end of apocalypse now was aimed at Jolie, but since her tits got cut off and discarded in the jungle, it confused the targetting/homing systems on the bombs and a lot of innocent vietnamese people were killed instead, thats why jolie adopts vietnamese kids to this day, because it was because of her discarded tits that their parents got killed in a b52 strike in the vietnam war.

True story ^

Cancer, its a helluva drug.
 

Tsumi

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Mar 18, 2010
Messages
13,518
How so? My understanding is that this vaccine simply tells the immune system to kill the cancer cells (which it SHOULD already be doing). It isn't like they're splicing people with naked mole rat DNA.

The human body is an incredibly complicated system. One type of cancer vaccine is separating out the surface markers into just the protein, and injecting it in the hopes that the immune system will respond to the isolated markers. Once it begins attacking the isolated markers, it will start to attack the markers on the cancer cells as well. That is basically what one part of this method does.

I just worry that there are things their not telling us, like refuring to the vaccine as "agents" what kind of agents? Maybe I've watched too many SciFi movies.

But I do see hope in it, and if it actually works and helps saves people than that would be extraordinary.

http://stm.sciencemag.org/content/10/426/eaan4488.full

Full science text is right there if you bothered to follow the links. Worst case scenario is the immune system starts attacking your organs, but the risk of that is extremely low. Other autoimmune diseases like arthritis and allergic reactions might become worse.
 

chenw

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 26, 2014
Messages
3,977
In before people use Andrew Wakefield's research to try and bar this vaccine from being used.
 

daglesj

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 7, 2005
Messages
5,455
Keeping those babyboomers going for another 20 years of full pensions! Nirvana.
 

c3k

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 8, 2007
Messages
2,289
Is this vaccine used to cure the mouse cancers which were induced by using electromagnetic radiation testing on the mice? Seem simpler to just not irradiate them.

;)
 

beemanit

n00b
Joined
Apr 23, 2016
Messages
33
Being we're on the subject of Vaccines I just want to point out the Law:

Title 42 § 300aa–22. Standards of responsibility

(B) Unavoidable Adverse Side effects; warnings

"(1) No vaccine manufacturer shall be liable in
a civil action for damages arising from a vaccine-related
injury or death associated with the
administration of a vaccine after October 1, 1988,
if the injury or death resulted from side effects
that were unavoidable even though the vaccine
was properly prepared and was accompanied by
proper directions and warnings."



So in a nutshell, if a vaccine is 100% lethal to the person the Manufacture is 100% protected by Gov and not responsible. Companies and shareholders protected!!!

People say a lot of things about vaccines both for and against. I would suggest actually looking up the studies and reading what actual scientist say about them. Saying "I believe a vaccine is / isn't good" is not science.

Also one must consider in the U.S. they are giving approx 30 vaccines to kids before the age of 6. That is a secured continual income that makes vaccine manufactures exorbitant amounts of money. Yet we have more and more people diagnosed with ADD, ADHD, Autism, Breast Cancer, crones disease, etc.... Many of the vaccines have not had enough studies done to prove they aren't doing something else to our bodies (may cure the cancer but make you brain dead in the process). These companies lobby to the CDC with one good study even though 90% of the studies could prove the vaccine is harmful and if they pay off the right politician, the vaccine gets approved.

I'm just saying look into it.

If you or a loved one may have been injured by a vaccine you may want to look into the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 and see if you can get compensation from the Government (U.S. Taxpayers). This program has already paid out $3.6 Billion to vaccine victims. Again the manufactures product harms someone and the taxpayer pays for it. A win for the vaccine manufacture again.
 
Top