Re: The "I'd rather have her get cancer than have sex" dept.


NashtOn wrote:
chris.linthompson@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
NashtOn wrote:

Windy wrote:


Yeah, it's not like the ToE helps cure cancer or anything... oh, wait.

Evolutionary Biology Research Techniques Predict Cancer
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=40340

-- w.


"In fact, he speculates, genetic diversity among tumor cells might help
explain why therapy sometimes fails. If a tumor contains a diverse
population of cells, some of those cells are more likely to resist
treatment, Maley says. Adapting to and surviving chemotherapy, these
resistant cells could breed, leading to a cancer relapse. He hopes to
pursue this hypothesis in the future. "More immediately," he adds, "we
intend to validate the new study with other cohorts and other types of
tumors."

Speculation doesn't save lives, Windy.

Yes it does. That's what experimental medicine is all about, bonehead.


Hey retard--

Being abusive won't win arguments.

Pot. Kettle. Ebon.

But you're correct. I should not have called you "retard". Most
retarded people are pleasant and cheerful.

Why didn't you quote this part:

***
In the study, Maley and colleagues analyzed precancerous tumor data
from 268 patients, including multiple biopsies within each tumor. On
average, these patients were followed for 4.4 years, during which time
37 developed cancerous tumors. Overall, the database used in the study
represents more than 32,000 distinct genotypes of different cells
within the tumors.

Using computational techniques to analyze the data, the researchers
calculated measures of diversity inside the tumors. Essentially, they
counted cell varieties and measured the genetic difference, or
divergence, between those varieties. "Simply put, we took ecology
measures of species diversity and translated them into measures of cell
diversity within tumors," Maley says. The found a striking correlation
between increased diversity of tumor cells and progression to cancer.
For every additional cell variety detected in a tumor, the patient was
twice as likely to progress to cancer.

Primo, this data has everything to do with genetics and little to do
with the ToE as it pertains to macroevolution, which is what most of the
discussions are centered upon in this ng.

And genetics has everything to do with macroevolution, which you would
know if you ever bothered to learn anything about the subject. Oh,
wait- you learned everything you were ever going to learn already.
Brain full! Nothing else allowed in!

Secundo, how has this discovery been used to save lives, which was the
whole point of the discussion.

Has it been put to use yet? Surely, such a high-powered medical
life-saving uberprofessional who earns 5 figures (as you made sure we
all knew) such as yourself would understand the value of being able to
take a biopsy and predict, with some level of confidence, whether a
currently benign tumor would later become malignant.

***

Afraid of a few numbers, Nancy? Hard data, like you keep asking for.

I didn't ask for data. Can you read?

You constantly demand experimental data. Except when it's presented-
then you say it's meaningless, or you didn't want it, or some other
crapola. A coward's retort- anything to avoid something that upsets
your little red wagon.

When someone gives it to you though, you can't beat feet fast enough.

You're just too sad for words.

Insults won't win you arguments, neither will hand-waving.

I notice you never addressed any of the points. Evasions, as usual.
Poor Nancipoo- you just won't ever get it.

Chris

.

Relevant Pages