 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Cancer / November 2007Researchers have bred a 'Supermouse' that is invulnerable to cancer.
Story via http://Muvy.org > Story via http://Muvy.org Maybe if in my next life I will return as a mouse and then this will really mean something. >> Story via http://Muvy.org > > Maybe if in my next life I will return as a mouse and then this will > really mean something. I can't see the original post, Supernews seems to have censored it for inscrutable reasons of their own, but the link is to a story on the BBC that University of Kentucky researchers have bred a line of mice with an added active gene for the protein "prostate apoptosis response-4" (Par-4), which appear not to get cancers. ( news.uky.edu/news/display_article.php?artid=2937 ) In previous lab studies they have shown that Par-4 which in involved in the cell-death or apoptosis mechanism, causes cells which become cancerous to die more readily. This latest development shows that mice can live apparently healthy normal lives with this gene, that it is not killing off normal cells. However earlier research by the same team implicated the same gene in the development of Alzheimer's disease, so it is clear that there is much work needed before this comes near to producing a useful treatment for human cancer. ( www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/08/980814064931.htm ) Tim Jackson > > "Joe" <useful_infos@yahoo.com> wrote in message > <snip the web page> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > the cell-death or apoptosis mechanism, causes cells which become > cancerous to die more readily. Well, thanks for that, Tim. alt.support.cancer's not especially interested in mouse studies because there's thousand's and thousands; many of which go nowhere and the ones that do - from bench to bedside take 10 or more years. And many here don't have that time. I think that was Betsy's point. It was crossposted by a man who posts the same page, from time to time, probably a make money page. His page has got advertisements on it and if I'm understanding this correctly http://www.cancerlynx.com/hits.html he probably has a log file that says how many times his pages or graphics were viewed so he can report it to his advertisers. J [one newsgroup trimmed] >>> "Joe" <useful_infos@yahoo.com> wrote in message >> <snip the web page> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > And many here don't have that time. > I think that was Betsy's point. I think it was my point too. > It was crossposted by a man who posts the same page, from time to time, > probably a make money page. That perhaps is why it was censored. I didn't mean to raise the Usenet censorship issue here, it's a bit OT, but I think this one is a grey area at least. After all J, he is not the only person to repost web articles to Usenet groups of appropriate topic. If he hosts his news on a website that is financed by a few inconspicuous ads down the side, I can't really get upset about that being commercial advertising on Usenet. He's doing nothing fundamentally different from Medscape or any commercial news service. Should I get banned because I sometimes cite Medscape articles? If the poster also owns the news site, it may be incest or narcissism but I doubt you could make a case for abuse on that basis alone. Posting a summary and link to the original article does defeat his profit mechanism. Although I fumbled it, the link should of course have had "http://" on the front. Tim >>>> "Joe" <useful_infos@yahoo.com> wrote in message >>> <snip the web page> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >>> I can't see the original post, Supernews seems to have censored it for >>> inscrutable reasons of their own, To clarify, I have in the last few minutes received an explanation from Supernews as to why posts such as this are being blocked. It appears that there is a technical incompatibility between their server and Google's which results in all crossposted messages posted through Google Groups not getting crossposted but only appearing on the first named newsgroup on the Supernews server. At present they seems to be in dispute as to who's interpretation of the interface specification is correct. Tim |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.