I would love to see some of those pictures!
Edit: one of them is in the paper linked below,https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/early/2018/10/30/181066411...
Amazing what the human race can accomplish!
Not everyone is a brilliant scientist, but every brilliant scientist relies on the rest of the collected mass of humanity to make it through their day.
"The problem was that the experiments also found that the patient's immune system was fighting the virus and effectively removing it from the body within three weeks, thus preventing it from completing its anticancer action."
Anyway, good that they managed to get research to the clinical trials level (it is not one more miracle cure for cancer that makes happy only laboratory mice and rats communities) and extends our knowledge how immune system works.
As much as I'd like to see cancer defeated and the suffering of millions reduced to nothing, I don't think this is the way.
We have to be VERY careful what we are doing with tools like CRISPR and the like. We now wield instruments to reshape biological life. Anyone who studied biology for a period can attest to the insane complexity and interconnectedness underlying both micro- and macro-level systems in biology. It is next to impossible to predict how any biological system will react as whole over long periods of time. The complexity is akin to predicting the weather years from now.
All our approximations, models and calculations developed over decades running on the toughest new supercomputers can't produce accurate weather forecasts even just 3 days from now. What hubris to believe the same could be done in biology!
The current top comment rightfully points out the danger of giving a virus the ability to fully circumvent all immune defense systems and hand out apoptosis like Santa Claus on Christmas.
The fact is that there is not a single medical treatment available that is fully understood; we regularly learn new things about aspirin, which is one of the most studied medications ever, and which has been in use in some form or another since a medieval wise woman chewed on some willow bark. Applying the sort of standards you're trying to hold genetic engineering to would take away every tool in the medical repertoire, aside from perhaps the bone-saw.
we don't know what we are doing. we have repeatedly - over and over - done things that do grievous damage, some of which (the dumping of megatons of CO2 into the atmosphere) are ongoing and some of which (Diethylstilbestrol, for example) did insane and long-lasting harm to generations of human beings.
And people want to give it a clean bill of health after three months of beta testing by mice? No games studio would ship something like this.
I had two really long discussions (hours) with a former PhD in genetic, although he did not wrote anything about DNA: he was studying population of plants, insects and sometime cattle. From what i understood, the issue with GMOs is that the change is too fast, and other organisms from the same ecosystem often can't adapt. But this case sometime appear with "natural" settings too. And human exploitation of ressources have the exact same effect, but often without any scientist to limit the damage, as they are called after most of the damage are done.
Obviously, the first papers already are discussing the ethical impact of such actions:
the effects of messing with our own biology, let alone releasing a new virus capable of "destroy" cancer would be massive.
Because people confuse technology with science -- and think that when someone cautions against one, they are against the other.
Or, in the words of Dr. Ian Malcom: "Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should.".
As it is we are mostly starting with species that we introduced into new geographies.
But we already have several proven and frequently used methods for largely knocking out the immune system, i.e. immunosuppressants?
>> Findings from this study, in conjunction with future work on SVV-antibody interaction sites, can provide a promising stage for the development of SVV mutants with improved clinical applications.
In this case "improved clinical applications" means man-made variations that can be patented. I mean, why wait? Sure go ahead and try to improve on it, but in the mean time isn't it recommended for trials (in addition to other treatments) against certain cancers? Or is it and I'm just not aware?
Brain storming idea:
the brain itself is a special place in some way shielded from the immune system. It would be great if ie injection of the virus in a glioblastoma would work. Probably with some measures to prevent oedema
Some virus, like herpesviruses are able to fuse with the genetic code of the host and remain there indefinitely. The inmune system will not touch it at this state normally.
Search for 'What is a viral infection?', read down from there to '1. Attachment' and make sure to expand the help tip on that one.
From a 30 sec scan of the article, this is about a specific virus' preferential binding to a site that is expressed in many cancer tumors (anthrax toxin receptor 1, ANTXR1).
This would allow viral-driven targeting of those cells (and few others), one of the hardest problems in oncology. You can't hit what you can't find, or you have to soak the entire body in enough toxic chemicals (chemo) to ensure it reaches the tumor cells.
As with many things in microbiology, it seems we knew this virus could preferentially target cancerous tumors. But we didn't know precisely why (aka "the mechanism") or how. This paper is proposing an answer to that question.
Microbiology is essentially the study of how to build 3d puzzles with chemistry and physics. Doing that is hard.
I'd highly recommend learning the basics of biology at the microbiology and biochemical levels. It's a fascinating world, helps explain everyday macro-medicine (read: what a doctor tells you), and I've found a surprising number of useful parallels in computing systems design.
(Correct me if I'm off on anything, it's been a while since microbiology)
Except, of course, for being the second-leading cause of death. The problem is being attacked from every angle, I'm not sure what you suggest they do better. The plague-burn-out methods might save your life someday.
"In an attempt to understand how the virus works, researchers at the University of Otago in New Zealand discovered in 2017 that the virus binds to a receptor called ANTXR1, which is active in more than 60 percent of the cancers in humans."
Much better premise than the Umbrella corp. of Resident Evil or all the other cliche zombie tropes
> The story is set in New York City after a virus, which was originally created to cure cancer, has wiped out most of mankind, leaving Neville as the last human in New York, other than nocturnal mutants.
Mostly, Just Another Generic Zombie Film, though.
The Omega Man is also a much better film adaptation than the Will Smith effort. Killer soundtrack too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Omega_Man
Fiction hasn't been accurate at predicting good things in the future, but it sure has been spot on when predicting the bad stuff. It feels like we're living in one of those frustrating horror films where the protagonists ignore obvious warning signs and put themselves in the worst possible situations.