Slashdot Mirror
Gene Therapy Ages Human Cancer Cells in Lab
mattr writes "Korean scientists are the first in the world to selectively age off and kill human cancer cells, by injecting a gene that suppresses telomerase, a cancer-specific enzyme that normally makes cancer cells immortal by protecting the telomere tips of their chromosomes. The telomere length modulation mechanism was found by two scientists from Yonsei University and colleagues at U. Central Florida, and is reported in the April 1 issue of Genes and Development magazine."
my bet is that the in the end the korean guys will be forgotten and only the americans will be remembered... same thing happens on a smaller scale with the graduate students doing the research and the professor... that's how it works. it's not fair.
Investing forum
This is incredible in theory, but what time frame are we talking about in humans once this gene is injected? Will it adversely affect human cells? I read it targets a cancer specific enzyme but am I missing anything? Could this be a cure, after the fact? (Bio-Medical newbie here).
Be True, Unbeliever
Can we ... stop the aging of other cells?
Yes, but immortality is a feature of cancerous cells. That might be a Bad Idea.
This is exactly why the United States needs to donate more money to basic research. Of late science has seemed unimportant to the government, research funds have reduced and things aren't being done to provoke technologies. Instead of the government subsidizing all sorts of medications from the drug industries, there just needs to be more research towards more permanent alternatives and a reduction in patent powers. There are gene therapies for AIDS coming out and candidates for vaccines, but yet the US government still spends more money on sending current drugs out than actually thinking long term. This is sad when a small country like Korea has gotten ahead of the US and they certainly have in stem cell research and now potetially gene therapy. It would be great to have California's CIRM on a larger level.
(\_/)
(O.o) This is Bunny. (> <)
If telomerase makes cancer cells immortal, is someone working on a way to make, uh, non-cancer cells immortal?
I think loosing fertility is a suitable side-effect for most people with cancer. If this works 100% or at least if you can tell if it will work or if it won't, then most people will be happy to give up their fertility in exchange for ridding their body of a potentially deadly enzyme. Also, this will be a wonder drug for seniors, who could most likely care less about fertility and who chemotherapy will make incredibly weak and not worth living.
Infertility is also a side-effect of, well, being dead because of cancer.
If you were given the choice between being alive but infertile or being dead, which one would you choose?
My site
Cancer patients are worried about loss of life, not loss of fertility. Fertility loss is manageable. First of all, loss of fertility is an acceptable trade off if it means you won't die of cancer. But if it is a concern, you simply bank some of your sperm or eggs before undergoing the procedure.
Also keep in mind that the vast majority of cancers strike later in life when, presumeably, you are less likely to want to have, or to be capable of having, children.
Actually, saccharin doesn't cause cancer in humans. A few years ago, it was found that the mechanism which caused the bladder tumors in rats does not happen in humans. Notice how they no longer print the warning on packages of sweet'n'low? Besides, they had to feed the rats TONS of it to get them to develop the tumors anyway.
well true but if you do use fetal cells for research which are not controlled by the government they take away all you government funding. Since the medical community is largly funded by the government it makes it extremely hard to do this research. In a sense the government basically has banned it. Taking away all of someones money because they did something you don't like is pretty much the same as banning it but in a really nice way since you don't go to prison for violating the law.
afaik, telomerase breaks down telomeres, no matter what kind of cell you have.
That's upside-down. Telomeres automatically shorten themselves with every cell division. Cells with very short telomeres die. This acts to limit cell divison, and probably exists (among other reasons) to limit runaway growth like cancer. Telomerase is not involved in this process at all, and in fact is not present in most normal cells.
Telomerase acts to lengthen telomeres so that the cells in question can keep dividing. Telomerase exists likely so that cell which do need to divide forever (like germ cells and bone marrow cells) can overcome the telomere limit imposed on the rest of the body.
afaik, telomerase breaks down telomeres, no matter what kind of cell you have.
Again, that's backwards. Most cancer cells express telomerase where the normal cell wouldn't. This lengthens the telomeres and allows cell division to continue.
Thus, inhibiting telomerase will re-impose the division limit on cancer cells, suppressing tumor growth. That's what this study claims to do.
Summary:
Telomere: passive cancer suppressor/division limiter present in every cell.
Telomerase: enzyme to allow a few special-case cells to keep dividing despite telomeres.
Cancer: often turns on telomerase in cell types where it should be dormant.
I stole this sig from someone cleverer than me.
Actually, as a born and bred American scientist I think that it is American culture that is destroying science in this country. Few students have the curiosity and persistence that research requires, and our instant gratification culture only makes this tendency worse. Also, there is now an active segment of society that is vocally opposed to much of science (the fundamentalists; christian, jewish, and islamic). Take this together with a general lack of performance and interest in science and mathematics relative to other populations, and you have a recipe for decreasing the role of science in American culture. I hope to hell that somebody keeps pushing the boundaries of knowledge and keeps it free and open, a long standard that America has followed and maintained. The point of science is also not to be a nationalistic endeavour, but rather a pursuit of knowledge. It's a meritocracy, and if that means that most science will be done in Asia by 2050, then good for them because they saw the opportunity, were interested, and worked for it. America did the same thing in the last century but our current theocratic leanings and lack of interest in science as a culture will be our downfall as the scientific elite. It's not too late to rescue it though, but I think it's unlikely.
Seriously, go home to your own country and publish there. I am not saying this to be rude, and I know it sounds very politically incorrect.
Here is the deal. The USA has a ton of money. They try and steal as much talent from foriegn countries as they can. Two things happen because of this. First, the USA benifits from the brains it gets. It is just like 100 years ago with natural resources from third world countries. Now it is with human talent. A good example would be baseball, and how we are "farming" the dominican republic and other latin american countries. The players come here because the most money is here. But imagine, just for one second, if those players said to hell with the money, we want national pride, our own leagues, our own system. The talent in the USA would go down, and the games in the forigen countries would get much more interesting. But I digress. This is about science. Imagine if, for example, all the brainy chinese people who have come to the USA for graduate studies in the sciences stayed in their own country. I think it is reasonable to assume some of these people will be good enough to add something to the progress of, say, wepons systems. Now the USA has one more means of power, of forcing other nations to do what they otherwise would not want to do, or to not do what they would be inclined to do. For example, China has been waiting for the right moment to take back Tiwan. They have not because of the USA.
So my adivice to all the foriegners is GO HOME. The USA is not the great place you have been lead to believe. You can make just as good a life at home as here, probably better. But if you measure sucess by money, sure you will probably make some here. But if you measure sucess by happiness, then go home. The only bad thing about staying home is, sooner or later, the USA will find a reason to bomb your country. I think in the past decade we have bombed countries in over 4 continents, including europe. And it does not matter how much the rest of the world hates us, we keep doing it anyways.
Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."
Unless you live in the rest of the world that isn't America, then you could purchase beer legally.
You are sick. Even if you believe for a second that the parent might be making it all up, just say nothing.
PowerLevel.com - A next generation marketplace for virtual items and services