Slashdot Mirror
Cancer Fighting Drug Found in Dirt
firesquirt writes "From an article in LiveScience, the bark of certain yew trees can yield a medicine that fights cancer. Now scientists find the dirt that yew trees grow in can supply the drug as well, suggesting a new way to commercially harvest the medicine."
"Pharmaceutical company patents dirt; Critics claim prior art"
-William Brendel
Heh, pity there isn't a +1, original mod really.
... it's not all about yew, after all. It's the dirt from whence yew came, and where yew shall ultimately return....
In other news, astrophysicists have announced that they now know what all that dark matter is: it's stupidity.
...we discover these things that the Earth provides us, and yet we learn nothing of protecting it from ourselves.
Silly monkeys.
I HATE when people and even pseudoscientific articles talk about a medicine against "cancer". Hell, there is NO cancer. There are CANCERS. Lung cancer has a completly different nature than, say, bllod cancer, ot colon cancer, or skin cancer. Yes, all of them are chaotic grow of the cells, but their nature, symptoms, erradication and even cell behaviour is completly different. It's therefore naive to talk about a "cure for cancer". It's like saying: a drug against virus has been found. Hell! WHAT virus? They are all different!
It's time to realise that Abble's products are the biggest abomination these days. Just say NO to the dumb iAbble way!!
When it turns out he is a shower dodger to avoid cancer.
Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
What truth?
There is no dupe
Now this is what i call a cancer Treetment.
And just when yew'd thought yew'd heard it all.
I can still hear the words of my college biology instructor from 30 years ago: "It's not dirt, it's soil."
Its right in front of us and underneath us!
It's quite interesting to note that one of the species of yew mentioned (i assume the most useful at yielding the drug) has been classified as NT (Near threatened).
This basically means the species is "considered threatened with extinction in the near future". With such a large area of yew trees producing such a small amount of drug, careful measures are going to have to be taken so as not to kill off our new hope for a cancer cure. It's also quite interesting to note that the yew only grows to about 15metres, and so much smaller than what i would know as a (european) yew tree.
Drug companies do this all the time. It's a hell of a lot faster and cheaper than rational drug design.
Keep dreaming.
haha... that i didn't mind looking at :P
I have bad karma. What do I care what you think?
So much for our parents telling us not to eat dirt as kids.
Pharm. companies are going to be able to process this at the lowest levels (literally), while still being able to charge us $75/pill for the "cure"? Anyone else see the twisted irony of being dirt broke (slaps knee) after you have to pay for 2 years worth of cancer(read soil) treatments?
I thought the whole point was to find traits common to each of these different types of cancer and target those. For instance, I've read that cancerous tissues tend to have a much higher metabolic rate than other tissues. Is this true of all or most cancers, or only a specific one?
Amongst all of the crime, political crap slinging, disasters, and crisis that the news brings to us on a daily basis it's nice to find something resembling progress taking place -- even if it is "dumbed down for the masses" who can't or don't study it.
*tch*
The things people throw away these days...
Summation 2
Damn! This means the phrase "eat dirt and die" will be so outdated, unless said to a tumor.
The headline makes it sound like a new wonder drug was found. According to the article, this drug was found in 1967. So it's been around for quite a while. They've just found that the soil around the trees end up with the drug in it to. Thus when they harvest the drug, they can harvest the soil to get more of it at one time. Nothing new cure wise, just a better way for drug companies to produce a product.
I was one of the guinea-pigs that tested it. It worked incredibly well, better than the alternative at the time which hadn't worked for me leaving me with a choice of taking part in the experiment or trying a large dose of the other medicine with little chance of success.
I'd heard at the time that it was becoming viable because they'd found a way of synthesising it using chemicals extracted from the needles of the tree, so reducing the impact on the tree. If they can get hold of it with less impact on the tree then that's great!
As a point to all those people who think of "natural remedies" as harmless and western medicine as evil: I was treated with yew tree bark and some fungus. These two nearly killed me even in the precisely controlled doses, doses that had been determined through the deaths of some thousand or so rats rather than trial and error on some thousand or so humans. Now many thousands of humans can be saved from what is quite a nasty death thanks to this new treatment.
Natural remedies are just the same as any other item taken into the body. They can be good, or can cause harm. Unfortunately in this case, animal experiments did work very well and in my opinion have caused net good.
Paclitaxel is a drug used in the treatment of cancer. It was discovered at Research Triangle Institute (RTI) in 1967 when Monroe E. Wall and Mansukh C. Wani isolated the compound from the bark of the Pacific yew tree, Taxus brevifolia, and noted its antitumor activity in a broad range of rodent tumors. By 1970, the two scientists had determined the structure of paclitaxel. Paclitaxel has since become an effective tool of doctors who treat patients with lung, ovarian, breast cancer, and advanced forms of Kaposi's sarcoma.[2] It is sold under the tradename Taxol. Together with docetaxel, it forms the drug category of the taxanes. Paclitaxel is also used for the prevention of restenosis (recurrent narrowing) of coronary stents; locally delivered to the wall of the coronary artery, a paclitaxel coating limits the growth of neointima (scar tissue) within stents.[3] Paclitaxel drug eluting coated stents are sold under the trade name Taxus by Boston Scientific in the United States. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paclitaxel
I wake up and find an articles on finding drugs in dirt and capturing CO2 from the air. A whole lot of drugs were originally isolated from organisms that grow in dirt, most of the antibiotics probably. This is not news. Also, any chemist should know how to capture CO2 from the air. But can you do it efficiently enough to reverse the greenhouse effect. On thermodynamic grounds alone, I'd say it's not possible except by planting a lot of trees to store all the CO2. My point is that the science watch on /. goes a little weak over night.
cheaper generics are already available under millions if American couches.
It'll be dirt cheap for those who need it
With all the problems in the world like cancer and hunger and war, we sit here getting all flamed up over the most recent version of....
oh wait...
Dirt is what's under your fingernails. Plants grow in earth or soil.
And they're going to call this new commercial product: Yew Tubes !!
Thank you and goodnight.
Aikon-
Well, I'm off to Sosaria and make me some coin!
(and maybe kill some guards)
Never play chicken with a passive aggressive.
You are right, paclitaxel is not an unconventional alternative at all, but rather a pharmaceutical marketing dream come true, because Bristol-Myers_Squibb, licensed to commercialise paclitaxel, held an exclusive contract in the harvesting of Pacific yew trees from US government lands.
Also paclitaxel causes cell death both in healthy cells and in cancer cells, and its extraction is quite difficult (costly).
My comment was rather misleading since I was making a general statement rather than commenting specifically on this chemical.
I guess that thing I said as a kid to go ahead and eat my dirty food was true (after dropping on ground):
"god made dirt, dirt don't hurt...."
"All great things are simple & expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope." --Churchill
Most people forget that all higher organisms depend heavily on micribiota for their survival. For example, most of the complex micronutrients (e.g. B-comlplex vitamins) in plants are generated in soil bacteria. For these drugs, look to the rhizobacteria as the source of the genes for these compounds. The commensal relationships these bacteria sustain with particular plant species could be important, but it's possible these things could be grown in vitro and yield a nice industrial solution.
There exists no way of exchanging information without making judgments. --Bene Gesserit Axiom
So it seems those new age, tree-hugging hippies weren't "barking" mad after all. They "yew" what they were doing all along. And I guess that, as far as pharmaceutical companies are concerned, money does grow on trees after all. Hey, that's "tree" of a kind so far. I'd better stop now and see if I can afford a mortgage on a tree house.
(emphasis mine)
Well, I guess you could compare Woody Hayes to Mt. St. Helens...
Yew trees normally grow in graveyards (in the UK at least).
No sig today...
Let the strip-mining operations to cure cancer begin!
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Yews control the medecine market.
Mostly random stuff.
So this cancer is fighting a drug they found in dirt?
Or did they find in dirt some cancer fighting a drug?
Prescriptive grammar:linguistics
"Yew trees" ain't right; it's "y'all y'all's trees", yuh damn Yank!
it's well-known that black walnut trees make sure they have less competition for water and nutrients by leaching poison out their roots.
so why didn't anybody think to check the ground around yew trees earlier for taxol?
moral: everybody fouls their nest. expect it. what, you never heard of an alpha geek who got fired for being the alpha?
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
Did anyone else think of this movie too? You know, the scene where she buries her boyfriend in the medicinal dirt to save his life?
steampunk web design
The Celts (probably the Druids before them) used the Yew for medicinal purposes all the time - they also knew to only use small amounts of anything but the berry, as everything about that tree is poisonous in anything but minute amounts.
Except they forgot to mention that the tools used to extract the molecule cause cancer.
"Please, shut up. Just when I think you can't say anything more stupid, you speak again." -Archie Bunker.
See some history: 1958, the NCI sends the USDA to test 30,000 plant species for potential anti-cancer activity. 1963, Monroe Wall discovers that the bark of the Pacific yew tree is effective against cancer. 1967, the active ingredient is isolated. 1971, the chemical structure is discovered and published. 1993, Bristol-Myers Squibb starts selling Taxol, at twenty times the cost of manufacturing. The patent still belongs to them today. See more about how this works.
So, in short: citizens pay for research which is then handed over to corporations who then sell the results back to the aforementioned citizens at a hideous markup. Fabulous work if you can get it.
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
Taxol was originally discovered by a massive National Cancer Institute-funded USDA survey of 30,000 plant species for potential anti-cancer activity. If you want to know why Bristol-Myers Squibb holds a patent on Taxol and can sell it at a 2000% markup (I'm not exaggerating; they sell it for twenty times the manufacturing cost), well, you've got me there. I think Ralph Nader's given a talk about it.
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
BZZT. Taxol was original discovered and extracted by a government-sponsored program, the kind which you abhor so much. Bristol-Myers Squibb, on the other hand, is selling it at twenty times the cost of manufacture, because of, uh, the magic of the market, or something like that. Blazing efficiency, there. Can't imagine what would have happened if we hadn't handed them the multi-billion dollar patent rights.
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
Cure rates nearly that of conventional treatments, without the grueling side effects of chemotherapy and radiation? Interesting! Could you point me to where the research was published?
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
There are many routes to finding this knowledge other than your scientific ones. Natives in North and South America, as well as Africa, have medicine men who work on some completely different level than you or I. They have knowledge of plants and combinations of plants for many therapeutic purposes that we would take hundreds of years to figure out; they've just always known about them. If you asked one of them, they'd tell you that the plants spoke to them and told them about themselves.
We want to think we're so much more advanced than they are, but it only looks like we're winning because we, living in moderately safer environments (i.e., there aren't really any predators looking to eat any of us here in the city) and having access to hospitals and whatnot tend to live longer.
And finally, really now, moderators, the "flamebait" mod is there to preserve civility here. Use it.
Ok kids, here's a Public Service Announcement:
:-)
Do NOT follow the federal guidelines for getting tested for colon cancer. They recommend you start at 50. Well, I'm 47 and apparently I've had it for a couple of years, and in a couple of weeks I'll be having my colon removed and little bag stuck to my side for the rest of my life.
The good news I'll still have a life.
And counter-intuitive as it may seem, consider getting a female doctor. Smaller fingers.
The revolution will NOT be televised.
Look, the DCA story isn't as simple as we'd like it to be. Clinical trials are going on, and if you're wondering why you shouldn't buy it from a chemistry supply company and try to treat yourself, Orac and Abel Pharmboy have some information which might interest you. "The media is told not to report it"? Look, it's the media not reporting it! Could you even be bothered to do a Google search before throwing out your conspiracy theories?
In short: (a) The drug has never been actually given to live people for cancer. (b) The drug doesn't kill cancers, it slows their growth. (c) This isn't the first time a drug has shown mighty promise in the lab; this doesn't mean it will work in practice. (d) The drug is not without side effects, and isn't entirely safe, though if it works against cancer, these risks are no doubt acceptable. But until it's shown to be effective, it's not good to give it to people.
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
The american chestnut tree once covered 25% of america. (see wikikpedia for a good background, its a story I am fascinated about). There are numerous attempts to overcome the blight that kills them. What does work now, but cannot be supported for large forests is: dirt. For some reason I feel like planting a garden this year.
I can see it now . . .
Due to harvesting we are now facing a crisis in our Earth's most valuable natural asset, Dirt. We must do something now, or soon we will be floating in space without a Planet!
- Kal`Goblez
I nominate the headline on the parent for second best /. headline ever, right behind "Germs' drummer arrested for carrying soap". Especially when they're taken together.
"I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
You guessed it--it's YEW.
"Not an actor, but he plays one on TV."
Of course, in this case, the government was in charge of the whole thing, and it turned out rather well. But I don't quite understand what you're saying--of course there are some things the goverment is good for, and some things that private industry is good for. It's like having a left hand and a right hand. Using that metaphor, here's the story thus far:
Bloke down the pub: The right hand is the only hand that counts. The left hand is never useful--it would have totally bollocksed up this program.
Me: But the left hand in fact executed this program, and did so rather well.
heinousjay: That's only one counterexample! You just want to cut off everyone's right hand!
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
Didn't they "accidentally" discover two different cures for cancer a couple months ago? Why fight it when you can cure it? They should concentrate on bringing those cures to the marketplace.
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
Thomas Covenant the White Gold Wielder declared prophetic of this discovery; loan of the Land declared sacred.
-- @rjamestaylor on Ello
> So this cancer is fighting a drug they found in dirt?
> Or did they find in dirt some cancer fighting a drug?
Yes! So glad that cancer is doing its part in fighting the drug war...
They're just going to cure mice & rats with it, leaving the humans high & dry.
~Vexed and loving it!
Maybe... but you can't make a good longbow from yew dirt, now, can ya?
So there.
You're still whining about why drug companies neeeeeed all that money, but you've yet to address my central point, which is that BMS did nothing to deserve the windfall profits they've been drawing from a drug they didn't discover or develop. We might as well just send them an extra fifty billion from the federal budget, by your logic.
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
Mostly, I agree with you; but, there are cases where the "tinfoil hat" IS the business decision that the twelve-year-old can grasp:
"Cure vs treatment". The profit motive (by itself) would far rather sell a treatment than a cure.
And: "Patentable vs nonpatentable".
You can see how on *purely* business grounds, cures would not get the clinical research dollars as compared to treatments. (And non-patentable cures versus patentable treatments...well...)
Lucikly, not all research is purely business (companies can have people in them who genuinely want cures, especially for serious diseases, there is the glory and honor element, and so on...).
But as an example, consider the minor ailment athlete's foot. It's a huge industry. It's a fungus. It's absolutely not impossible to get rid of. But you will get marketed treatments, not cures (it'll cure the fungus on your foot, but you'll quickly get reinfected from your shoes, socks, shower, and so on; and they don't ever try to sell you anything to fix the problem once and for all. Doing so would be a poor business decision.) People don't have it in Japan, hence, no huge stinky-foot industry either. From a business point of view this is just lost profits!
"If you want a better system for orphan drugs, then lobby your congressmen to expand NIH funding to include drug trials for orphan drugs. Public dollars would be well worth spending in that area."
Absolutely.
(And by the way, it doesn't help our anti-tinfoil-hat position when the government fails to support fair, open and honest research into the various claimed medical effects of cannabis, due to drug-war hysteria, but that's a different roll of foil I guess...)
37 acre tree farm covered in Yews and dirt in CT. Note: It was my childhood home and I frequently filled the holes that the yews were in with water to make swimming holes in the summer. I can attest to being cancer free... but not sure if our lack of a proper swimming pool damaged the cancer curing dirt. =)
I reckon they'll be clear-cutting them yew trees to get at that soil...
Ok, I'm going to be silly and feed the anonymous troll...
Mostly, I agree with you; but, there are cases where the "tinfoil hat" IS the business decision that the twelve-year-old can grasp:
"Cure vs treatment". The profit motive (by itself) would far rather sell a treatment than a cure.
So they are hiding the cures because they want to sell a treatment? Who is hiding it? Who discovered it that has that motive? As I said before, NIH dollars fund the most basic research which leads to new biology/drugs. Pharma does a little of that, but most of their dollars go into the clinical trials. So the academic researcher working for NIH funds has *ZERO* motive to hide the cure. *ZERO*.
So your tin-foil-hat theory rests on the key discovery being made by smaller amount of primary research being done in Pharma companies. Who do you think does the research, runs the bench experiments, crunches the numbers in those Pharma companies? Is it the high-end management who stands to make a killing from corporate profits? No. It's done be Ph.D. scientists and lab techs. A decent sized group of them.
Do you honestly think someone lab tech with a B.S. biology degree is going to be paid enough money to shut up about some great disease cure that is found by their group?
How about the Ph.D.'s in the group? Earning a Ph.D. is a long long haul. Most folks doing that are pretty smart and could have made much more money going to business school if making money was their number one priority. Most scientists care about knowledge, care about cures, and yes, like the prestige and recognition for making a major discovery. How likely is it they are going to keep a disease cure secret so the top management can get big bonuses? Not very freaking likely.
Even if some would do it, all it would take is one in the group to leak it. Keeping secrets in groups just doesn't work very well. Now stop to think what if a friend/family-member/loved-one of a member group has the disease? Not that unlikely with any decent sized lab group. Still think they are going to keep a cure secret? Please.
But as an example, consider the minor ailment athlete's foot. It's a huge industry. It's a fungus. It's absolutely not impossible to get rid of. But you will get marketed treatments, not cures (it'll cure the fungus on your foot, but you'll quickly get reinfected from your shoes, socks, shower, and so on; and they don't ever try to sell you anything to fix the problem once and for all. Doing so would be a poor business decision.) People don't have it in Japan, hence, no huge stinky-foot industry either. From a business point of view this is just lost profits!
Umm, Bullshit. Where do you tinfoil hat nutters come up with this stuff. Yes, they get athlete's foot in Japan. Need me to google for you? http://www.japancorp.net/Article.Asp?Art_ID=12391 Now, if you want to claim Japan has a lower incidence, I might believe you because I've never bothered to look up the statistics. However if that is in fact the case, that might be due to a more rigorous cleaning of public pools/showers, (places where it is most likely to be transmitted) in Japan than in the states. Not some secret cure that the American pharm companies are hiding from us.
Anti-bacterial drugs are relatively easy to make because you can often simply target the cell wall. Fungi are eukaryotes, like humans, and don't have a cell wall. One of the problems that comes along with that is that drugs that damage fungus, also tend to damage humans. Lamisil is a drug you often see marketed on TV. Take enough of it and it is absolutely guaranteed to cure your Athlete's foot. The cure is not hidden from you at all. The problem is it may well also kill your liver before all the athlete's foot is gone. Fungi are hard to kill without killing human cells. Ask any researcher who has had to deal with fungus in their tissue culture.
Get it? Yew trees? Iolo the bard, from Yew? Oh God, it's not that funny, I barely get it myself.
GOD HELP ME WHY CAN'T I BE FUNNY TOO!?!
One of the things I'll miss most about being at University is journal access. Journals should be offered for much less. Subscriptions are exorbitant and individual articles run $20 to $80. With publishing going electronic you'd think that electronic versions could be offered for much less. Maybe $10/year per subscriber. Really I already paid for lots of the research so why aren't the articles public domain?
Of course that's where they found it!!! I saw some guys from pfizer bury it there after they realized they wouldn't make any money from it...
-ubuntu others as you would have others ubuntu you.
Your joke points to a sad reality however, that it's only through patenting cures (ie having a monopoly over a cure) can pharmaceutical companies (free enterprises) get the investment capital to develop medicines. Cures are IP, traded and guarded.
In this case, Taxol, the company that markets and distributes the drug didn't spend a dime on developing the drug. The National Cancer Institute, NCI, spent $183,000,000 to develop and test Taxol. Then the NCI turned around and "sold", what a joke, the rights to all of the data needed to get approval for the drug by the FDA to Bristol-Myers Squibb for $43,000,000. The NCI spend $140,000,000 more to develop and test Taxol than it got for the rights. In 2000 MBS made almost $1,000,000,000 on Taxol. That's American taxpayers money at work.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Uninformed conspiracy nuts seem to think Pharm companies do all the medical research. The NIH (National Institutes of Health) will spend more than 28+ Billion on medical research this year (your tax dollars at work).
This drug, Taxol, is a good example of government spending on medical research. Taxol was developed and tested by the NCI, it cost $183,000,000. But then the NCI rurned around and pratically gave away the rights to all the test data to Bristol-Myers Squibb for a measly $43,000,000.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Your contemptuous tone as if anyone saying the Conspiracy word is a nut case. hahahaha The word is still in the dictionaries. Say there buddy ro, how much did you pay for gasoline or diesel or whatever other garbage you pay for so you can breathe it in later? hmm? Maybe your Presidente and Vice Presidente conspired to destroy the faxes I sent them telling them about my engine four years ago . And how much did YOU PAY for last month's electric bill? hmm? $100? $150? $200? I released an engine on November 14 2005 that can make this world's peoples just about total electric, yet isn't that strange. You don't seem to have that one either > http://www.newpath4.com/MillenialDawn1usesFriction forPositiveWork2sharedswitchdefeatsActionReaction3 ForceDualitygeneratorequalsavlowhysteresis4Reverse HysteresisasPowerSource.pdf .
The word Conspiracy is going to stay in the Funk & Wagnall's a while yet.
Industrial Age 2 + How-to Stop Malignant Cancers.
What we should do, is get the yew trees to grow in AIR, and then extract the cancer fighting drug from the air :) Much purer that way...
Lord Yew's underground research facility has finally hit pay dirt.
Less people dieing of cancer == more slaves
I know that my scientific education isn't good enough to really do much more than sound intelligent when surrounded by a bunch of sales people and bankers, but I was under at least one impression.
Cancer is a rapid cellular growth caused by a mutation of the DNA.
So as far as I understand, this means that due to some form of stress, external stimuli, or just 2 wires accidentally getting crossed because with that many cells in a persons body, one will eventually go wrong.
Now, the world is spending billions of dollars looking for the magical touch that will allow them to clearly identify all sections of DNA as well as develop tailored drugs to specifically target and alter DNA. Also, if I understand some of the other articles I've read, the theory of attacking cancer would be to send out a focused medicine, chemical, radiation, etc... that could some how correct the DNA alteration and allow the damage to heal like a normal wound or cell replacement over time.
I've watched people... children die from cancer. I most clearly remember seeing an 11 year old girl come to grips with the fact that she can go at any time. The one thing I've got to say is, Chemo-therapy has got to be worse than death itself.
So my gripe is, who the hell cares about some tree bark, chicken liver, or tribal ju-ju dance that can treat one form of cancer or another when that type of cure seems more like sticking one band-aid on top of another on top of another. Shouldn't the funding and scientists be allocated to the cancer treatment that is more physics and less chemistry? After all, instead of standing in the middle of your field praying for rain, why not get some buckets and bring the water to the crops?
I've seldom seen such a failure to get the point. Here, I'll recap the thread for your convenience:
Bloke down the pub: Government research programs are inherently wasteful, and would never work.
Me: Actually, a government program discovered the drug we're discussing--but the patent was essentially handed to BMS, and they're gouging patients.
You: Drug companies have to charge a lot for drugs because of the R&D costs. Government-funded research programs would never work.
Me: But BMS didn't bear the R&D costs in this case. The government did. Weren't you reading?
You: I said, drug companies need the high profits because of R&D costs!
Me: I told you, BMS didn't pay for the R&D costs! You can say that they need the money, but you haven't explained why they actually deserve it in this case, since they didn't do the basic R&D on the drug any more than I did.
You: But drug companies need to charge high prices because of R&D costs.
Quoting directly, you said: Do you think all the employees work for free? I'm certainly not advocating that the government fund private research. The drug companies are making good profits for the risks they are taking, and thus need no subsidies.
If you'd been reading instead of mindlessly repeating yourself, you'd have noticed that (a) the government turned over its research to a private concern for commercialization, (b) the "risk", in this instance, was subsidized, while the profits were privatized. Whether or not BMS "need[s] no subsidies", they certainly got them.
Also, the government already does fund private research directly; see, for instance, the FDA's OOPD Grant Program, for just one example.
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
Now in addition to gold farmers picking up all the Yew Wood, you're going to have cancer farmers as well.
Nice job scientists!