Dipstick Test For Cancer Under Development

mfh writes "Scientists at Dundee University in Scotland are developing a test for early signs of throat cancer involving a dipstick. A team lead by Dr Ted Hupp will develop the test for early detection of Barrett's oesophagus, which often leads to throat cancer. Dr. Hupp said, "Currently, the diagnostic test for Barrett's oesophagus is for patients to attend an endoscopy clinic, which involves many hours of patient, nurse, and consultant time." Clearly a new, cheaper, effective, and faster test will save many lives."

Comments

Seriously

[LouCifer]

I'd like to see one of these for Colon Cancer. Anyone here have to go through a colonoscopy? They're NOT pleasant.

Smoker

[mfh]

> It's horrible that so many people are finally starting to live the effects of being longtime smokers... and yet many people who end up with throat cancer or emphysema are still unable to quit.

I was a smoker for about ten years, and I quit for over a couple years. What I found was that it was harder for me to breathe once I was quit than now that I've started smoking again. My sinuses are now back in order, and working great now that I have started smoking again.

I think the problem with smoking is that once you start there is pretty much no hope for you, today. When you quit you are more likely to suffer from allergies and ailments than when you smoke. Plus there is the whole mood factor. When I was smoke-free, I was cranky all the time, and almost depressed.

So essentially we're looking at quality of life vs. length of life. I'll take quality thank you very much! :-)

What we need to do is find a way to counteract the adverse effects of smoking, and stop pandering to health-nuts who think smoking is bad and must be stopped. I am a careful smoker who doesn't smoke around others, but that doesn't mean I should have fewer rights than someone who doesn't smoke. What it means is that the health industry should look at how to deal with the countless smokers out there without forcing them to quit. Once you do that, it will be much better to cure the whole problem. There is no help for someone who has quit smoking, at least in Ontario. No doctor wants to hear you complain about how stuffed up you are because you quit. They think it's your fault and pretty much do very little to make being smoke-free of any use at all.

I just feel better and healthier, smoking. Take away the adverse problems from quitting and living smoke-free, and I'll be first in line. The damage is already done to my system, and science can't fix it, yet.

Re:Smoker

[beeplet]

You bring up interesting points. I myself don't advocate extreme anti-smoking measures, like banning smoking in all public buildings. As long as restaurants have anti-smoking sections, I'm happy. Most people who smoke do know about the potential health risks, but don't stop for the same reasons as you - smoking does have a pleasurable effect. That's why it's addictive.

I just want to ask you something, though. When you say you feel healthier now that you've started smoking again, do you mean healthier than just after you quit, or healthier than before you ever started? The former sounds plausible though the latter doesn't. Real withdrawl from tobacco has a lot of consequences which are hard to cope with. Changes in appetite, anxiety level, mood, immune system, etc., etc. I don't smoke but both my parents used to and quit. My mother said it took her years to get over the desire for a cigarette - but she still thinks it's the best choice she could have made for herself.

What we need to do is find a way to counteract the adverse effects of smoking.

Here I disagree - I think we need to focus more on helping people quit. I know several people who have tried multiple times to quit and always ended up smoking more than ever, for the same reasons you talked about. And there's only so much you can do to prevent damage when you're breathing in tar and ash all day long.

Only marginally related to cancer

[hung_himself]

The test that they plan to develop is *not* a test for throat cancer but rather for a condition that makes people more likely develop throat cancer.

However, to be fair, "Barrett's oesophagus" *is* much harder to spell than cancer...