We have developed a new broad-spectrum antiviral approach, dubbed Double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) Activated Caspase Oligomerizer (DRACO) that selectively induces apoptosis in cells containing viral dsRNA, rapidly killing infected cells without harming uninfected cells.
I don't believe the biology of the human species utilizes Double-stranded RNA under any circumstances. Consequently, although it might be present in some of our genetic code, no healthy human cells should ever *express* dsRNA unless the cellular machinery has been hijacked by viral code. They did say testing it on 11 kinds of healthy mammalian cells produced no ill effects, but I guess that is by no means an exhaustive representation of a complete human being.
However, one wonders if unleashing this drug to fight an infection might produce a cytokine storm-like response in the host. In the worst of flu strains, it isn't the virus itself that creates the most damage - it is the stress of the body's response to the infection that ultimately causes the most suffering. Even if the virus itself may be relatively benign, a large enough infection can conceivably result in so many dead/dying cells that the toxic environment created by the big die-off will push the healthy cells off a cliff.
One also wonders how this drug may affect any viruses that have a symbiotic relationship with things we depend on, like gut-bacteria. Anyone who have undergone treatment with potent broad-spectrum antibiotics will tell you that recolonizing the GI tract with things like pro-biotics is often necessary to avoid certain types of diarrhea.
Forgive me for being unimpressed, but this argument has been carried out to the point of absurdity. From the article itself:
The U.S. could protest cyberattacks by sending a couple of aircraft-carrier groups to the China Sea for a little gunboat diplomacy, but it would be pretty embarrassing if China were to just repossess the whole fleet as partial repayment of the $1.2 trillion the U.S. owes it.
We'd end up having to pay off the whole debt just to get the boats back—plus whatever huge fee there would be for the towing and daily storage fee at the aircraft-carrier impound lot, and that's a lot of money to spend for bit of saber-rattling that would be futile in the real world and irrelevant in the virtual one.
Seriously? Take on a nuclear carrier group with a repo team? This kind of crap is even worse than the most egregious trolling by some of the loud-mouthed idiots found on slashdot. Please put some thought into a reasonable argument.
This bit of sophism is of no practical value. It sounds like you are saying the brutalization suffered by runaways being pimped and sex slaves is against the law only because of a prohibition against materially profiting from the trading of sex. Is the moral disposition of what they face magically changed just by a swipe of a legal pen? I think it is more reasonable to make the case that prostitution as a profession is very different from "sexual exploitation" - which most would agree *IS* a crime with real victims who have been deprived the freedom of self-determination. That is the lot of your runaways and sex-trafficked. However, it would be hard to draw that line of legality when the borders are so gray. What do you call it when economic opportunities are so bad that you have no choice but to allow your body to be used sexually because it is the only thing with any kind of demand? Would that be considered coercive or rational consent?
Ah, nostalgia! None of the younger slashdoters have any appreciation for the old jokes anymore. Curse me for having commented here, otherwise, I'd mod you for 'funny".
The article is written by Xinhua news staff and contains no technical information at all. The article is mostly your typical laymen fluff filled with public outrage, pundit soundbites, and general background information. The lack of details about the nature of the "circuit design flaw" really precludes this from being considered "news for nerds". As someone with experience working in an FDA regulated environment, oversight and accountability of projects and tasks is something I am quite familiar with. I wonder how much (if any) details will emerge that will answer some of the questions the circuit geeks among us would ask. I know it is a poor substitute (and maybe slightly off-topic), but this article from years ago has always stuck with me and constantly reminds me of the perils the electronics industry continues to face.
fanatical as in blind allegiance without rational thought. I repeat that I myself try to be progressive in my world-view and agree more often than disagree with the prevailing sentiments on Slashdot. What I am criticizing is the level of uninformed reactionary expressions that fails in adding to the discussion on these forums. Too many start typing here itching for a fight without a competent comprehension of what it is they are against and even less clue of what alternatives or counter arguments may be in order. I have nothing against holding a firm political view. But I do have more respect for convictions held with substance in mind. If you speak but doesn't give any thought to what you are talking about, you are less than stupid, you are a dangerously foolish voice that soils whatever discussion you bother to engage in.
I personally would like to see emerging foreign film industries develop to the point where they can deliver films of sufficient production quality and mass appeal to compete with anything Hollywood has to offer. There is a tremendous opportunity for them to mine their own rich culture/folklore for stories worth telling. American comics are not the only source of hero tales. Happiness will be the day when an adaptation of "Journey To The West" that truly works is made.
hmm... I would humbly say that your reply, does more than my original post to prove me wrong. It shows that in this format of an open discussion forum, there are tremendous opportunities for unrestricted and intelligent conversation. But to address (s)he who asked the original question, the moderation system is *NOT* sufficiently effective to make slashdot a source of reliable/authoritative science news and developments. For example, is the interest in gaming and sci-fi here an accurate reflection of serious science development in society at large? I suppose one can argue about whether geek culture is a part of science literacy, but I digress. I personally don't feel that mass moderation has been particularly effective at which stories are selected for display on the front page. Having said all that, I am inclined to agree with your concluding comment: that a spread of different publications will satisfy the original question nicely.
I believe you are asking a genuine question rather than trolling, so I'll put some effort into answering you seriously. As I reflect on the source of your confusion, I must confess that I am guilty of some gross generalizations that would be difficult for a "USian" I think I'll start using that term now to accept. It was late when I wrote out my thoughts last night so I apologize if I failed to put it into the proper contexts. I suppose it would have been more appropriate to rephrase the part you referred to as "fanatically liberal and/or fanatically pro-west in their tendencies." the GOP of USA and the Chinese just happen to be examples of many organizations that find hostility here. Others include trade groups that figure into copyright policies, religious organizations of all types, I'm sure others can cite more examples. I don't have as much political/cultural awareness to speak comprehensively and in depth on this particular aspect of the discussion to the point of providing copious citations. However, one example comes to mind involving US diplomat John Bolton's remarks during an interview during a European newscast. When asked why support a certain foreign policy measure during the Bush Administration, his response was something along the lines of "You have to be loyal to your party." Mr. Bolton happened to be a Republican working for a Republican president. But the same sort of blind political allegiance also affect supporters of ideas that are popular here on Slashdot. And the effect is the same - the Greater Good in The Big Picture is a casualty in a personal fight picked by someone with an agenda. In Global politics, ordinary citizen on both sides suffer for the ideals of a small group of power wielder. On Slashdot, intelligent discussion is squashed by those seeking to push their own views on others.
Slashdot is a great community for smart people. But, with respect, a person can be smart in one area but be embarrassingly ignorant in almost everything else. Slashdot is strong in technology and select physical sciences - perhaps to a fault. But those of us who've participated here for a while can relate a few cringe worthy episodes involving context in the biological sciences, history/geography, social/cultural awareness, etc. There is a fanatically liberal, pro-western slant to topics and opinions to the point where innovations, tech, or ideas originating in "the enemy camp" (Chinese, GOP, etc.) is regarded with derision.
Don't get me wrong - on most subjects, my personal views align more often than not with what I see on slashdot. But I experience intolerance/extremism and narrow-minded ignorance here more often than I would like from my own camp, and I am embarrassed by it. Slashdot is enjoyable as thought provoking entertainment that at times can be delightfully silly. But I would not trust Slashdot as a serious way to keep up with science developments.
Well, obviously not. Aside from the cool factor, that earlier story really stuck with me because it was so inspirational and was a beautiful illustration of so much that is wrong with the political priorities of our current society.
Years ago, I began using hulu to catch up on Joss Whedon's "Dollhouse" before I started using Netflix to watch other shows. They have a smaller selection of titles, but for what they do have, new episodes of current series are available usually the day after they air on the regular networks. the annoying thing with Netflix is that it seems they wait for the DVDs to be available (regardless of anything else) before they make the streams available.
The simplest way to push Google+ is to leverage the noise-making power of fan-boys the world over. Imagine the volumes of traffic and the recruitment potential for Google+ if they can attract enthusiastic fanatics to fight classic holy wars such as:
VI vs EMACS Harvard vs Yale Liverpool vs Manchester United Edward vs Jacob Barbie vs. G.I. Joe
With the trolls so distracted, maybe they'll leave slashdot in peace for the rest of us, at least for a while.
Dude, the post you're responding to was about disappointment over trolling on a post about the Chinese in space. How is it logical that it is actually about being pissed at the US? Funny logic you subscribe to, but if that's your intent, the whole damn discussion ought to be modded "offtopic". I'm in agreement with the original poster, a little perspective and open-mindedness goes a long way in "learning a thing or two".
The average/.er is usually above average in technology literacy. However, a large overwhelming majority is hopelessly retarded in the area of cultural awareness and social maturity. I'm as curious as the next guy about what other nations are up to scientifically and technologically. But any time anything related to China comes up, I cringe at the embarrassing displays of stupidity and ignorance that this majority is capable of unleashing. Unfortunately, it comes with the territory on slashdot, so instead of asking our cohorts to go and educate the Chinese, I make an effort to post an intelligent counterpoint or two to educate my fellow/.ers. Most of the time it falls on deaf ears or result in more trolling, so I've become more conservative over the years.
America declining, China rising.... sign of the times.
Forget the dimwits among us. Think and act for yourselves.
No, we are pissed off that we don't seem to have the testicular fortitude to actually fund a decent space program.
Or have you missed the news this week about the last Shuttle flight, with nothing to replace it. Now granted the Shuttle turned out to be a clusterf**k, but there is no clear direction on what to do next.
And of course the Chinese are to be blamed for that.
I don't necessarily disagree with you just yet, but would you please justify your "correction"? How does projection of naval power have anything to do with a perceived "policy of destroying it's own wealth"? There is, in fact, much to argue the opposite. Any student of economics or military history would be familiar with the work of Alfred Thayer Mahan. The ideas outlined in his seminal work "The Influence of Sea Power upon History" is as influential today as it was when it was written more than 120 years ago. Politics aside, the requisition needs of the US Navy for bleeding edge defense technology keeps critical industries healthy in the United States. By comparison, the Chinese are trying to leap frog the competition through domestic efforts in defense, space, etc., but they just don't have the tradition of innovation or resources to do so effectively. The result is that they have to resort to importing the necessary tech or settle for copycat knock-offs - often of outdated and/or embarrassingly inferior quality. In any case, the point still stands: Carriers are non-trivially important.
That is a nice start, but won't you please finish expressing your thought? Which adversary has decent subs and what makes them decent? I'm genuinely curious.
...... Like the aircraft carriers and stealth fighters , this is just flag waving "me too'-ism.......
Carriers are *NOT* trivial money black holes. One of the main reasons America can pursue its current foreign policy on the world stage today is because of the capability of carrier task forces to project power globally. The United States currently have 11 nuclear powered carriers in service. The current plans are for new units of the next generation Gerald R. Ford class carriers to replace current ones (starting with USS Enterprise) on a one-for-one basis as they become operational. Contrast that with reductions and cutbacks in other defense expenses. Like, for example, how Virginia class attack subs were developed as a more economic alternative to continued development/building of the more expensive Seawolf class. Carriers are one aspect of the US's defense capacity that will become more vital as emerging powers approach parity with the US in all aspects of the world arena.
Google white blood cells for more information or go to medical school.
Of course! because Google and medical school are similar solutions to the same problems. The subject at hand isn't quite as easily explained with first year biology. As versatile and powerful as they are, no varieties of white blood cells are inherently equip to deal with magnetic nano-particles. Bad things happen when we put things in our bodies that evolution has not devises a way to handle. Ever heard of black lung disease? Developing tolerance to a foreign agent is no easy task. Even though human beings have been consuming alcohol for almost ten thousand of years, our liver still suffers damage if we ingest more than it can handle. If you had bothered to read the article, it is specifically mentioned that the inadvertently drawing the attention of the immune system with the nanoparticles could lead to dangerous allergic reactions. I don't know how much googling *YOU* have done or if you've gone to medical school. Frankly, it doesn't appear you have much of any higher education. Whatever the case may be, I urge you to carefully examine your thoughts before you decide you are informed enough to express them. -- your public gaffes will be her long after you are gone
You sound like you might have experience working in a federally regulated environment.;-) Yes, contamination, obviously cuts both ways. In fact, when we inspect each vial before they are labeled and packaged, my colleagues and I are one of the last lines of defense against product contamination of any kind. Before being qualified to work in our area, candidates undergo an intensive three week training to become proficient at spotting biological contamination, micrometer sized foreign particulates, etc. in all vials produced at our plant. Trust me, by the time the vials reach us, they are (should be) sealed securely enough that we don't introduce anything into the vials. The strict handling protocol I referred to earlier is largely for our protection when vials are inevitably broken during handling. As I said before, the antibodies are conjugated to some pretty nasty molecules. They have to be in order to be effective anti-cancer agents. If you are stricken with an aggressively growing tumor, having such nasty stuff inside you to help save your life isn't a hard choice to make. But for perfectly healthy manufacturing technicians, even casual or accidental exposure is a pretty raw deal given how good the antibody components are at finding and binding to certain parts of the body. You may not have any tumor tissue if you are healthy, but still..... We complain all the time about how stupid and tedious all the precautions are, but the protection we receive is indisputably first rate. So I wonder, the question I started this tread with: what about at the other end?
Slashdot Mirror
Michel Colman? Do I know you from somewhere ?
From the abstract:
We have developed a new broad-spectrum antiviral approach, dubbed Double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) Activated Caspase Oligomerizer (DRACO) that selectively induces apoptosis in cells containing viral dsRNA, rapidly killing infected cells without harming uninfected cells.
I don't believe the biology of the human species utilizes Double-stranded RNA under any circumstances. Consequently, although it might be present in some of our genetic code, no healthy human cells should ever *express* dsRNA unless the cellular machinery has been hijacked by viral code. They did say testing it on 11 kinds of healthy mammalian cells produced no ill effects, but I guess that is by no means an exhaustive representation of a complete human being.
However, one wonders if unleashing this drug to fight an infection might produce a cytokine storm-like response in the host. In the worst of flu strains, it isn't the virus itself that creates the most damage - it is the stress of the body's response to the infection that ultimately causes the most suffering. Even if the virus itself may be relatively benign, a large enough infection can conceivably result in so many dead/dying cells that the toxic environment created by the big die-off will push the healthy cells off a cliff.
One also wonders how this drug may affect any viruses that have a symbiotic relationship with things we depend on, like gut-bacteria. Anyone who have undergone treatment with potent broad-spectrum antibiotics will tell you that recolonizing the GI tract with things like pro-biotics is often necessary to avoid certain types of diarrhea.
Forgive me for being unimpressed, but this argument has been carried out to the point of absurdity. From the article itself:
The U.S. could protest cyberattacks by sending a couple of aircraft-carrier groups to the China Sea for a little gunboat diplomacy, but it would be pretty embarrassing if China were to just repossess the whole fleet as partial repayment of the $1.2 trillion the U.S. owes it.
We'd end up having to pay off the whole debt just to get the boats back—plus whatever huge fee there would be for the towing and daily storage fee at the aircraft-carrier impound lot, and that's a lot of money to spend for bit of saber-rattling that would be futile in the real world and irrelevant in the virtual one.
Seriously? Take on a nuclear carrier group with a repo team? This kind of crap is even worse than the most egregious trolling by some of the loud-mouthed idiots found on slashdot. Please put some thought into a reasonable argument.
This bit of sophism is of no practical value. It sounds like you are saying the brutalization suffered by runaways being pimped and sex slaves is against the law only because of a prohibition against materially profiting from the trading of sex. Is the moral disposition of what they face magically changed just by a swipe of a legal pen? I think it is more reasonable to make the case that prostitution as a profession is very different from "sexual exploitation" - which most would agree *IS* a crime with real victims who have been deprived the freedom of self-determination. That is the lot of your runaways and sex-trafficked. However, it would be hard to draw that line of legality when the borders are so gray. What do you call it when economic opportunities are so bad that you have no choice but to allow your body to be used sexually because it is the only thing with any kind of demand? Would that be considered coercive or rational consent?
Ah, nostalgia! None of the younger slashdoters have any appreciation for the old jokes anymore. Curse me for having commented here, otherwise, I'd mod you for 'funny".
Oh, come on guys! EMI much? Not all pollution is the biological kind! Ask any (radio) astronomer. http://xkcd.com/654/
The article is written by Xinhua news staff and contains no technical information at all. The article is mostly your typical laymen fluff filled with public outrage, pundit soundbites, and general background information. The lack of details about the nature of the "circuit design flaw" really precludes this from being considered "news for nerds". As someone with experience working in an FDA regulated environment, oversight and accountability of projects and tasks is something I am quite familiar with. I wonder how much (if any) details will emerge that will answer some of the questions the circuit geeks among us would ask. I know it is a poor substitute (and maybe slightly off-topic), but this article from years ago has always stuck with me and constantly reminds me of the perils the electronics industry continues to face.
http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/hardware/bogus
fanatical as in blind allegiance without rational thought. I repeat that I myself try to be progressive in my world-view and agree more often than disagree with the prevailing sentiments on Slashdot. What I am criticizing is the level of uninformed reactionary expressions that fails in adding to the discussion on these forums. Too many start typing here itching for a fight without a competent comprehension of what it is they are against and even less clue of what alternatives or counter arguments may be in order. I have nothing against holding a firm political view. But I do have more respect for convictions held with substance in mind. If you speak but doesn't give any thought to what you are talking about, you are less than stupid, you are a dangerously foolish voice that soils whatever discussion you bother to engage in.
Astronomer Neil deGrasse Tyson talks about Who's More Pro-Science, Republicans or Democrats?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7Q8UvJ1wvk
I personally would like to see emerging foreign film industries develop to the point where they can deliver films of sufficient production quality and mass appeal to compete with anything Hollywood has to offer. There is a tremendous opportunity for them to mine their own rich culture/folklore for stories worth telling. American comics are not the only source of hero tales. Happiness will be the day when an adaptation of "Journey To The West" that truly works is made.
hmm...
I would humbly say that your reply, does more than my original post to prove me wrong. It shows that in this format of an open discussion forum, there are tremendous opportunities for unrestricted and intelligent conversation. But to address (s)he who asked the original question, the moderation system is *NOT* sufficiently effective to make slashdot a source of reliable/authoritative science news and developments. For example, is the interest in gaming and sci-fi here an accurate reflection of serious science development in society at large? I suppose one can argue about whether geek culture is a part of science literacy, but I digress. I personally don't feel that mass moderation has been particularly effective at which stories are selected for display on the front page. Having said all that, I am inclined to agree with your concluding comment: that a spread of different publications will satisfy the original question nicely.
I believe you are asking a genuine question rather than trolling, so I'll put some effort into answering you seriously. As I reflect on the source of your confusion, I must confess that I am guilty of some gross generalizations that would be difficult for a "USian" I think I'll start using that term now to accept. It was late when I wrote out my thoughts last night so I apologize if I failed to put it into the proper contexts. I suppose it would have been more appropriate to rephrase the part you referred to as "fanatically liberal and/or fanatically pro-west in their tendencies." the GOP of USA and the Chinese just happen to be examples of many organizations that find hostility here. Others include trade groups that figure into copyright policies, religious organizations of all types, I'm sure others can cite more examples. I don't have as much political/cultural awareness to speak comprehensively and in depth on this particular aspect of the discussion to the point of providing copious citations. However, one example comes to mind involving US diplomat John Bolton's remarks during an interview during a European newscast. When asked why support a certain foreign policy measure during the Bush Administration, his response was something along the lines of "You have to be loyal to your party." Mr. Bolton happened to be a Republican working for a Republican president. But the same sort of blind political allegiance also affect supporters of ideas that are popular here on Slashdot. And the effect is the same - the Greater Good in The Big Picture is a casualty in a personal fight picked by someone with an agenda. In Global politics, ordinary citizen on both sides suffer for the ideals of a small group of power wielder. On Slashdot, intelligent discussion is squashed by those seeking to push their own views on others.
Slashdot is a great community for smart people. But, with respect, a person can be smart in one area but be embarrassingly ignorant in almost everything else. Slashdot is strong in technology and select physical sciences - perhaps to a fault. But those of us who've participated here for a while can relate a few cringe worthy episodes involving context in the biological sciences, history/geography, social/cultural awareness, etc. There is a fanatically liberal, pro-western slant to topics and opinions to the point where innovations, tech, or ideas originating in "the enemy camp" (Chinese, GOP, etc.) is regarded with derision.
Don't get me wrong - on most subjects, my personal views align more often than not with what I see on slashdot. But I experience intolerance/extremism and narrow-minded ignorance here more often than I would like from my own camp, and I am embarrassed by it. Slashdot is enjoyable as thought provoking entertainment that at times can be delightfully silly. But I would not trust Slashdot as a serious way to keep up with science developments.
My bet is on 8.3%:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050083/
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/03/30/1426214
Well, obviously not. Aside from the cool factor, that earlier story really stuck with me because it was so inspirational and was a beautiful illustration of so much that is wrong with the political priorities of our current society.
Years ago, I began using hulu to catch up on Joss Whedon's "Dollhouse" before I started using Netflix to watch other shows. They have a smaller selection of titles, but for what they do have, new episodes of current series are available usually the day after they air on the regular networks. the annoying thing with Netflix is that it seems they wait for the DVDs to be available (regardless of anything else) before they make the streams available.
Dude!
The simplest way to push Google+ is to leverage the noise-making power of fan-boys the world over. Imagine the volumes of traffic and the recruitment potential for Google+ if they can attract enthusiastic fanatics to fight classic holy wars such as:
VI vs EMACS
Harvard vs Yale
Liverpool vs Manchester United
Edward vs Jacob
Barbie vs. G.I. Joe
With the trolls so distracted, maybe they'll leave slashdot in peace for the rest of us, at least for a while.
Dude, the post you're responding to was about disappointment over trolling on a post about the Chinese in space. How is it logical that it is actually about being pissed at the US? Funny logic you subscribe to, but if that's your intent, the whole damn discussion ought to be modded "offtopic". I'm in agreement with the original poster, a little perspective and open-mindedness goes a long way in "learning a thing or two".
Welcome to slashdot my friend.
The average /.er is usually above average in technology literacy. However, a large overwhelming majority is hopelessly retarded in the area of cultural awareness and social maturity. I'm as curious as the next guy about what other nations are up to scientifically and technologically. But any time anything related to China comes up, I cringe at the embarrassing displays of stupidity and ignorance that this majority is capable of unleashing. Unfortunately, it comes with the territory on slashdot, so instead of asking our cohorts to go and educate the Chinese, I make an effort to post an intelligent counterpoint or two to educate my fellow /.ers. Most of the time it falls on deaf ears or result in more trolling, so I've become more conservative over the years.
America declining, China rising.... sign of the times.
Forget the dimwits among us. Think and act for yourselves.
No, we are pissed off that we don't seem to have the testicular fortitude to actually fund a decent space program.
Or have you missed the news this week about the last Shuttle flight, with nothing to replace it. Now granted the Shuttle turned out to be a clusterf**k, but there is no clear direction on what to do next.
And of course the Chinese are to be blamed for that.
I don't necessarily disagree with you just yet, but would you please justify your "correction"? How does projection of naval power have anything to do with a perceived "policy of destroying it's own wealth"? There is, in fact, much to argue the opposite. Any student of economics or military history would be familiar with the work of Alfred Thayer Mahan. The ideas outlined in his seminal work "The Influence of Sea Power upon History" is as influential today as it was when it was written more than 120 years ago. Politics aside, the requisition needs of the US Navy for bleeding edge defense technology keeps critical industries healthy in the United States. By comparison, the Chinese are trying to leap frog the competition through domestic efforts in defense, space, etc., but they just don't have the tradition of innovation or resources to do so effectively. The result is that they have to resort to importing the necessary tech or settle for copycat knock-offs - often of outdated and/or embarrassingly inferior quality. In any case, the point still stands: Carriers are non-trivially important.
That is a nice start, but won't you please finish expressing your thought? Which adversary has decent subs and what makes them decent? I'm genuinely curious.
...... Like the aircraft carriers and stealth fighters , this is just flag waving "me too'-ism.......
Carriers are *NOT* trivial money black holes. One of the main reasons America can pursue its current foreign policy on the world stage today is because of the capability of carrier task forces to project power globally. The United States currently have 11 nuclear powered carriers in service. The current plans are for new units of the next generation Gerald R. Ford class carriers to replace current ones (starting with USS Enterprise) on a one-for-one basis as they become operational. Contrast that with reductions and cutbacks in other defense expenses. Like, for example, how Virginia class attack subs were developed as a more economic alternative to continued development/building of the more expensive Seawolf class. Carriers are one aspect of the US's defense capacity that will become more vital as emerging powers approach parity with the US in all aspects of the world arena.
Google white blood cells for more information or go to medical school.
Of course! because Google and medical school are similar solutions to the same problems. The subject at hand isn't quite as easily explained with first year biology. As versatile and powerful as they are, no varieties of white blood cells are inherently equip to deal with magnetic nano-particles. Bad things happen when we put things in our bodies that evolution has not devises a way to handle. Ever heard of black lung disease? Developing tolerance to a foreign agent is no easy task. Even though human beings have been consuming alcohol for almost ten thousand of years, our liver still suffers damage if we ingest more than it can handle. If you had bothered to read the article, it is specifically mentioned that the inadvertently drawing the attention of the immune system with the nanoparticles could lead to dangerous allergic reactions. I don't know how much googling *YOU* have done or if you've gone to medical school. Frankly, it doesn't appear you have much of any higher education. Whatever the case may be, I urge you to carefully examine your thoughts before you decide you are informed enough to express them.
--
your public gaffes will be her long after you are gone
You sound like you might have experience working in a federally regulated environment. ;-)
Yes, contamination, obviously cuts both ways. In fact, when we inspect each vial before they are labeled and packaged, my colleagues and I are one of the last lines of defense against product contamination of any kind. Before being qualified to work in our area, candidates undergo an intensive three week training to become proficient at spotting biological contamination, micrometer sized foreign particulates, etc. in all vials produced at our plant. Trust me, by the time the vials reach us, they are (should be) sealed securely enough that we don't introduce anything into the vials. The strict handling protocol I referred to earlier is largely for our protection when vials are inevitably broken during handling. As I said before, the antibodies are conjugated to some pretty nasty molecules. They have to be in order to be effective anti-cancer agents. If you are stricken with an aggressively growing tumor, having such nasty stuff inside you to help save your life isn't a hard choice to make. But for perfectly healthy manufacturing technicians, even casual or accidental exposure is a pretty raw deal given how good the antibody components are at finding and binding to certain parts of the body. You may not have any tumor tissue if you are healthy, but still..... We complain all the time about how stupid and tedious all the precautions are, but the protection we receive is indisputably first rate. So I wonder, the question I started this tread with: what about at the other end?