Slashdot Mirror
Bacteria In Tumors Can Inactivate Common Chemotherapy Drugs, Study Suggests (arstechnica.com)
Researchers caught the bacteria Mycoplasma hyorhinis hiding out among cancer cells, thwarting chemotherapy drugs intended to treat the tumors they reside in. The findings have been published this week in Science. Ars Technica reports: Drug resistance among cancers is a "foremost challenge," according to the study's authors, led by Ravid Straussman at the Weizmann Institute of Science. Yet the new data suggest that certain types of drug-resistant cancers could be defeated with a simple dollop of antibiotics alongside a chemotherapy regimen. Dr. Straussman and his colleagues got a hunch to look for the bacteria after noticing that, when they grew certain types of human cancer cells together in lab, the cells all became more resistant to a chemotherapy drug called gemcitabine. This is a drug used to treat pancreatic, lung, breast, and bladder cancers and is often sold under the brand name Gemzar. The researchers suspected that some of the cells may secrete a drug-busting molecule. So they tried filtering the cell cultures to see if they could catch it. Instead, they found that the cell cultures lost their resistance after their liquid broth passed through a pretty large filter -- 0.45 micrometers. This would catch large particles -- like bacteria -- but not small molecules, as the researchers were expecting.
Looking closer, the researchers noticed that some of their cancer cells were contaminated with M. hyorhinis. And these bacteria could metabolize gemcitabine, rendering the drug useless. When the researchers transplanted treatable cancer cells into the flanks of mice -- some with and some without M. hyorhinis -- the bacteria-toting tumors were resistant to gemcitabine treatment.
Looking closer, the researchers noticed that some of their cancer cells were contaminated with M. hyorhinis. And these bacteria could metabolize gemcitabine, rendering the drug useless. When the researchers transplanted treatable cancer cells into the flanks of mice -- some with and some without M. hyorhinis -- the bacteria-toting tumors were resistant to gemcitabine treatment.
This seems actually kind of reasonable. I'm pleasantly surprised that it doesn't seem like wildly out of context pop-science clickbait.
Really get someone with proper English language skills to proof read these crap headlines at least. I know the text beneath it is obviously too much, but at least fix the titles.
I wonder if there's some sort of symbiosis going on between the cancer cells and the bacteria? Food supply in exchange for protection? Perhaps certain bacteria in the body prefer tumours over normal tissue.
I've not idea, just putting it out there. Perhaps I'm talking utter BS, just curious.
A bacteria species that can metabolize a drug designed to kill cells.
Kill rapidly-dividing-and-growing cells of selected cancers, yes - but... it can drink a chemo concoction and just.... burp?
That's almost scarier than the cancer itself.
They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
I have a classic book in front of me published in the year 1868, titled "GOD IN HISTORY and GOD IN SCIENCE," authored by London Pastor John Cumming (1807-1881).[1] May I say kindly, there's no such thing as an atheist! Some of the world's wealthiest celebrities have the stench of Hell on them, which is where they are all going, blaspheming the very God Who is kind to them. Luke 6:35b, "...for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil."
Legendary singer Billy Joel is a professed atheist...
"I gradually decided that just because I didn't have or couldn't find the ultimate answer didn't mean I was going to buy the religious fairytale. As an atheist you have to rationalize things." â"Billy Joel
On page 139 of his book, "GOD IN HISTORY and GOD IN SCIENCE," Pastor John Cumming makes a brilliant observation concerning professed atheists...
Atheism is folly as much as wickedness. But suffer me, before I show this, to say, that it is absolutely impossible that any man can be an atheist, in the strict sense of that word. All that any can say is this: "No spot that I have searched does reveal a God; every organization I have examined does not show traces of wisdom, goodness, and design:" but that individual cannot say; "There is no God;" because he cannot say, "I have soared to the farthest star, I have descended to the deepest mines, I have swept all space, and searched all time, and in the realms of infinite space I have not detected any traces of a God." In other words, to be able to say, "There is no God," you must yourself assume to be God, which is a reductio ad absurdum, an utter and a complete absurdity.
SOURCE: "GOD IN HISTORY and GOD IN SCIENCE," p. 139; by Rev. John Cumming, D.D.; New York: Published by Carlton & Lanahan; 200 Mulberry-Street; 1868.
What a brilliant observation. How can any man claim to be an atheist unless he has traveled to the farthest place in the universe? The nearest star to the earth (after our own sun) is Alpha Centauri, which is 4.37 light-years away (28,200,000,000,000 miles away!). This is just one star, being the closest to earth besides our own sun, which is 93,000,000,000 miles away. My friend, the Hubble Space Telescope has discovered that there are at least 200,000,000,000 galaxies in the universe. And each of those galaxies contains BILLIONS of stars! It is anticipated that when the James Webb Telescope is launched in 2018 from NASA, that it will discover over ONE TRILLION GALAXIES!!!
The Word of God teaches that God made the stars. I love how Genesis 1:16 is written... "HE MADE THE STARS ALSO." It's like the Bible is saying, "Oh, by the way, God also made all the stars!" Genesis 1:16, "And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also." God is amazing, Who knows the exact number of stars that He created, and he calls them each by their own name. Amen! Psalms 147:4, "He telleth the number of the stars; he calleth them all by their names." I have just briefly discussed the stars. The world that exists under a microscope is even more amazing, complex and a mystery to mankind. How can anyone reasonably claim to be an atheist when man hasn't even discovered what's in 90% of the earth's oceans? Pastor John Cumming is so right... For anyone to say, "There is no God!," you must yourself assume to be God! No human being has traveled to the ends of the universe. In fact, no human being has ever even left the Milky Way Solar System. Psalms 145:3, "Great is the LORD, and greatly to be praised; and his greatness is unsearchable."
John Cumming was a Scottish minister who was well-known for his anti-Catholic writings and preaching. Amen for that!
inside & out.. cease fire stand down.. we never saw us coming.. in creation we trust.. thanks again..
The Kanzius treatment is the way to go. http://www.news-press.com/story/news/2017/03/10/kanzius-cancer-research-delayed-indefinitely-amid-legal-fights/98846852/
something like that.. all things must pass,, if the movement stops the patient dies... goes for revolutionary spiritual process as well?
I wonder if there is a way to ensure that the bacteria only goes where we want? If so we could reduce many of the side effects of chemo by protecting the bone marrow and lymph systems.
... which have saved hundreds of millions of lives around the world since they were invented. Real, work of the devil they are.
"this shit is everywhere i dont know what to do anymore"
You could try educating yourself, then find out how to go and buy and cook fresh produce instead of dining at your local burger bar every day and drinking coke.
If we've got bacteria that can shield cells from the effects of chemotherapy, then that could potentially be very useful. If we can get it to do the same thing for the rest of the body in a relatively benign way, then it might greatly improve outcomes for chemo patients.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
in the 'future' we'll grow our vital organs on our outsides to reduce the amount of barbaric surgeries we must endure & to make blank 'people' to harvest spare parts from... sounds exciting? or we could just return to our natural (r)evolutionary patterns of good spirited zingyness.. see you there..
to break tech billionaires (& other assorted heartless/spiritless corepirate nazi psychos) out of greed/fear/ego based illusion of unlimited superiority & mass homicide ideations (depopulationings)...? both a big yuk & phewww on those behaviors from the compassion based creational spirits of the moms.. get over yourselves is the implied sentiment...
I'm actually working on converting paper chemotherapy orders to electronic at the moment, and I'm wondering if we are going to need to make slight modifications to our regimens. This is a pretty interesting study. Methinks I'll share it with our lead pharmacist.
Pretty scary stuff. The human race isn't going to be wiped out by global warming. We are all going to catch something incurable from one of those little ankle-biters crawling around the floor at Starbucks.
Have gnu, will travel.
What a coincidence when I've just read a similar article at this website https://williamreview.com/ez-r... . Maybe this phenomenon could be bad while a patient is being cured. But if the bacteria just works when he/she recovers, it could help him/her less painful, I think.
http://williamreview.com/
If certain bacteria can inactivate chemotherapy drugs, that could skew the data as to how effective the treatment was. A new drug might seem to be less effective than it really is unless the testing protocol takes this into account.
If I were your oncologist, I would prescribe chemotherapy to you aggressively.
The "snake oil" scientifically shown to help prevent neovascularization of some types of tumors as well as cellular apoptosis is for others.
You should be disallowed access and fed your chemo drugs (which I understand are very unpleasant).
That would be for preventing the research while people died left and right, while research from as far back as the 1970s hinted at this.
Fin.