GoErie.com: Kanzius treatment gets world's attention

Full story: GoErie.com

The telephone calls started shortly after 7 o'clock Tuesday night. Big-city newspapers and network television news organizations wanted to talk with Millcreek Township inventor John Kanzius.

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 9 of9
Jack Lux

New Albany, OH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Nov 1, 2007
 
It is hard for me to understand why the governor and the senators are not backing this patented project for such an important cause.
It would be such a great opportunity for the city and the state to have the manufacturing facility here in Erie.
John Kanzius has had terrific support from the local people and I think it is a matter of time until the higher level politicians realize the importance of manufacturing the product in Erie.
Ron Shrout

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Nov 1, 2007
 
I think what he's done and developed is great!!!! It's a shame that rabbits have to die for the sake of "testing", when we have "humans" that have "ZERO" chance of survival from cancer that would be MORE than willing to under go the treatment for "at least a chance"!! But, I'm sure the "DRUG INDUSTRY" would have something to say. I've know several people that would of been more than willing to "try it", not only to live but if nothing else, to help others, just as their doing now, because the cancer drugs that are bring given are "expermental"!!!
hunt boustead

Aberdeen, SD

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Nov 2, 2007
 
It would be great to see the christian community fund this project and recieve the blessing from this.
Fred Moolten

Canonsburg, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Nov 2, 2007
 
The GoErie news reporting on this cancer treatment method is probably not unreasonable, but the same is not true for some of the national reporting that has emerged, including that of ABC News. Although this treatment method, like hundreds of other experimental cancer treatments of equal merit, should probably be explored further, reporting it as a potential "breakthrough" is an unfortunate example of irresponsible journalism. As someone thoroughly familiar with the field of cancer research, I see this as the latest of many examples of how premature claims can provide false hope to cancer victims only to be followed by disillusionment. I read the scientific report on this study in the journal Cancer, and the results are unimpressive. The great challenge of cancer treatment is to find a modality that can target cancer cells selectively without intolerable harm to normal tissues. The reported experiments did not even attempt that, and there is nothing in the use of the radiowave device that suggests that it can address the challenge better than the many other treatments that have been tried over the years with only partial success. This new modality may or may not eventually prove useful, but its chances of working miracles are almost certainly close to zero. I believe that the University of Texas public relations department should keep this method out of the news and left for scientists to work on unless and until it turns out better than there is any reason at this point to expect.

Fred Moolten
JRB

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Nov 2, 2007
 
Fred Moolten wrote:
The great challenge of cancer treatment is to find a modality that can target cancer cells selectively without intolerable harm to normal tissues. The reported experiments did not even attempt that, and there is nothing in the use of the radiowave device that suggests that it can address the challenge better than the many other treatments that have been tried over the years with only partial success.
You seem not to have read the article very well. The application would require the use of nanoparticles which, once activated by radio waves, would destroy the cells in which they are found. I fail to see how anyone has offered false hope, unlike the media when pimping dubious cancer drugs on behalf of its largest commercial sponsors, the drug makers.
Fred Moolten

Canonsburg, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Nov 3, 2007
 
The reported experiments did not attempt to meet the principal challenge confronting cancer treatment - an ability to direct therapy to cancer cells, wherever they might be, while sparing normal cells - nor does it possess such an ability as an intrinsic property. Lacking this, any future use would be limited, and the prospect of a major breakthrough or cure would be remote. When I referred to "false hope", I was deploring implications that the treatment was on a path toward dramatic improvements in cancer treatment. It should be allowed to undergo further study outside of public attention, but media hyperbole does a disservice to cancer patients or their families.
JRB

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Nov 3, 2007
 
These efforts represent a very early stage of exploration, so your criticism is misplaced. Would you prefer that an effective treatment be announced only after it's been perfected in clinical practice? How would that work exactly in a free society with an independent press? Are chemotherapy drugs, which for several decades have failed to effectively treat the vast majority of cancers, some sort of success story? Everyone expects the media to hype these things while failing to disclose the truth about other things. If you "deplore the implications" embedded in such accounts, I think you may be living in the wrong country. Perhaps China would be more suitable. Just a thought.
Fred Moolten

Canonsburg, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Nov 3, 2007
 
JRB wrote:
These efforts represent a very early stage of exploration, so your criticism is misplaced. Would you prefer that an effective treatment be announced only after it's been perfected in clinical practice? How would that work exactly in a free society with an independent press? Are chemotherapy drugs, which for several decades have failed to effectively treat the vast majority of cancers, some sort of success story? Everyone expects the media to hype these things while failing to disclose the truth about other things. If you "deplore the implications" embedded in such accounts, I think you may be living in the wrong country. Perhaps China would be more suitable. Just a thought.
Unfortunately, this type of media reporting is one of a sad and long series of examples of alleged cancer breakthroughs that create false hope in cancer patients only to be followed by disillusionment. I find that reprehensible, even if this is not the first case. I am familiar enough with the experiments described here to be fairly sure that any future applications are likely to be limited, and my main purpose in commenting is to ensure that no-one with a personal stake in cancer has unrealistic expectations about the probability that a cure will come from this.

In regard to when I expect an "effective treatment should be announced", that answer is simply when there is some evidence that it is effective. The treatment reported here is one of literally hundreds of experimental cancer treatments of equal merit to this one. Occasionally, one of these ends up as a useful means of treating patients, but the majority do not. Because this particular treatment fails to address the major obstacle to effective therapy, selective targeting, there is no reason to expect that it will succeed more than the others. It deserves continued exploration, but not continued media attention, and certainly not the unfortunate media hyperbole it has received.
JRB

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Nov 3, 2007
 
Fred Moolten wrote:
<quoted text>
...I am familiar enough with the experiments described here to be fairly sure that any future applications are likely to be limited, and my main purpose in commenting is to ensure that no-one with a personal stake in cancer has unrealistic expectations about the probability that a cure will come from this..."
In what way are you familiar with the application of a developing technology such that your opinion trumps what researchers will take years to uncover? What is the premise for your statement that you are "fairly sure that any future applications are likely to be limited?" And do you really believe that you or anyone else can ensure what other people think or don't think about what they hear on the news? I would suggest to you that what people think is their own business.
Fred Moolten wrote:
<quoted text> In regard to when I expect an "effective treatment should be announced", that answer is simply when there is some evidence that it is effective."
So, you are unhappy with the current state of affairs with regard to pharmaceutical drugs and false advertising claims made to promote them. If not, then you have been overlooking the 800lb gorilla in the living room. Again, how do you propose a more balanced treatment of these matters in a free society with an independent press? Are you appealing to anyone in a position of legislative authority who might bring more regulation to bear on the media? And if the public should remain in the dark until corporate interests are ready to unveil what they hope to market as an "effective" treatment, how would this benefit those patients who have lost loved ones to Vioxx, Baycol, HRT, or any of hundreds of other drugs considered effective, some for decades, following FDA approval? In other words, who gets to define "effective?" It sounds like your concern should be directed toward better regulation of the drug industry, not the media.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 9 of9
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Other Recent Sanibel Discussions

Search the Sanibel Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Debate: Health Care - Sanibel, FL 2 hr rebecca dill 2
FL 2010 Florida Governor Race Election Results a "... (Nov '10) 8 hr True Words 2,616
FL 'Hiccup girl' charged with murder in Florida (Oct '10) 13 hr AND 1,786
cape or Ft Myers? (Aug '08) Tue The Duke 46
Super Boat races brings big business to Englewood Tue Mike McGuinty 1
Fort Myers Beach - Vacation Spot? (May '10) Apr 7 tim 24
Fishing fun at the Yacht Club Apr 6 Peggy 2
•••
•••
•••
•••

Sanibel Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Sanibel People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••