SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
EurekAlert reports on a potential "Early Breakthrough with Cancer Vaccine":
Lead Researcher Associate Professor [The University of Queensland] Kristen Radford says the vaccine has the potential to treat a variety of blood cancers and malignancies and is a major breakthrough for cancer vaccinations.
"We are hoping this vaccine could be used to treat blood cancers, such as myeloid leukaemia, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, multiple myeloma, and paediatric leukaemias, plus solid malignancies including breast, lung, renal, ovarian, and pancreatic cancers, and glioblastoma," she said.
"Our new vaccine is comprised of human antibodies fused with tumour-specific protein, and we are investigating its capacity to target human cells while activating the memory of the tumour cells."
According to Radford, the vaccine has significant advantages over the current entries in this space. Passing clinical trials is not a small hurdle however. An MIT study shows that 3.4% of investigational cancer treatments eventually receive FDA approval, although that has increased significantly in the past five years.
Journal Reference:
Frances E Pearson, Kirsteen M Tullett, Ingrid M Leal‐Rojas, et al. Human CLEC9A antibodiesdeliver Wilms' tumor 1 (WT1) antigen to CD141+ dendritic cells to activate naïve and memory WT1‐specific CD8+ T cells [open], Clinical & Translational Immunology (DOI: 10.1002/cti2.1141)
(Score: 4, Insightful) by RS3 on Friday July 10 2020, @04:07AM (5 children)
We The People agree with you. Something's blocking the road though.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Saturday July 11 2020, @02:11AM (4 children)
That seems weird too. Its almost like you don't have any say in the matter.
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Saturday July 11 2020, @03:04AM (3 children)
> That seems weird too. Its almost like you don't have any say in the matter.
Um, no disrespect meant from me, but is there some reason to believe we do have any say, in any matter?
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Sunday July 12 2020, @12:16AM (2 children)
Not really, unless you agree with Fusta who think Americans are too stupid and lazy to bother electing third parties.
My view is that you don't really live in a democracy.
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Sunday July 12 2020, @12:43AM (1 child)
USA is a republic (which has NOTHING to do with Republicans). In a democracy we would vote directly on issues. So now you'll have people arguing that USA is a democracy, and what I'm referring to is a "pure democracy". Saying the USA is a democracy appeases too many people. I wish we did get to vote on issues directly. We occasionally have a "referendum" on the ballet.
Our congress- senators and representatives, are supposed to connect with us and generally vote on issues in our favor. That worked much better when we were much smaller population. However, now they are swamped by lobbyists- people who are paid, generally by corporations, industry and other organizations, political action money, etc., and they "lobby" the congress. Badger and swamp them.
What we need to balance it: people's lobby.
3rd parties exist, and some have garnered significant votes, and some have won in lower offices, even state governors.
The problem: actually we're too smart to vote for 3rd parties. If you don't vote for one of the big 2, your vote just helps one or the other win.
But I get what you're saying- if enough of us voted for a 3rd party... But, the top 2 overwhelm the media and we barely know who any 3rd party candidates are, let alone what they stand for.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 12 2020, @01:04AM
Each state may be more or less democratic. Federally, we're a "representative democracy" aka "oligarchy playing musical chairs".