Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: Professor Mega-Mind on 12/09/2018 02:35:11
-
Cancer Treatment Strategy
**Summation pg.5 , Reply#99 .
New approach ; freeze it in-situ !
Radiation does not kill all of it , chemotherapy does not kill all of it , laser-therapy does not kill all of it , electro-therapy does not kill all of it , even burning does not kill all of it . Only a precisely placed , electrically-powered , freeze/burn needle-bulb can actually cook 100% of the cells in a target area . The key is constant identification of small tumors , and immediate out-patient cooking of them . If this strategy is pursued relentlessly , the nascent mini-tumors will never get big enough to cause serious damage . The additional use of immunotherapy will usually be the nail in the cancer's coffin .
The war on cancer must be fought for complete victory , not as a business , where highly-paid professionals make a rich living keeping cancer down , but not out . For the sake of the human beings dying here , the paradigm must be broken , and modernised .
Chase this enemy down , kill him where he lies . Never let him gather strength , then he cannot really hurt you !
Alright , made a sensitive point .
Adios , P.M.
---------------------------------------------------
*.Ref.:
^ quora.com/Cells-cant-interact-radiowaves-because-theyre-too-small-What-about-tissues-and-organs/answer/Derek-Hendricks-7?ch
-
It is a standard option, generally using a laser and fiber optic to heat the needle.
Problem is to identify minute tumors before they proliferate, and to cauterise not only the core of the tumor but sufficient of its blood supply to prevent regrowth.
In the most common cases such as adenomas and breast tumors, proliferation often precedes clinical symptoms,so you either have to x-ray yourself from top to toe every month or so, which will induce more tumors, or wait for symptoms, treat the primary and chase the secondaries where you think they are most likely to occur.
-
Yes mahn , they are steppin' in the right direction , BUT , I'd like to see it even more low-tech , & cheaper . Cheap & easy means more treatments . Say , how's about those newer low-intensity X-Rays ? One from the top , one from the side , and ya got the little buggers ! A robotic , computerized needle sticker , could handle patients assembly-line fashion , while consistently yielding extremely hi-accuracy results . Cancer-loving metallic compounds could be ingested to make micro-tumors more visible. Flood the target area with 0.5 ghz EM radiation , and you will kill much of the cancer with the resultant heat .
Hokay , feeling burnt out !.........P.M
-
Cancer-loving metallic compounds could be ingested to make micro-tumors more visible.
... if they existed. But they don't.
Flood the target area with 0.5 ghz EM radiation
At that frequency the wavelength is about 2 feet. You would be irradiating almost the whole patient. And enough heat to kill the cancer would kill the patient.
It's easy to kill cancer. What's damned near impossible is distinguishing it from healthy tissue.
How did you come to think that these ideas hadn't been considered before?
-
Cancer Approach
Try Johnson Mathey Tech.Rev. :
" Medicinal Organo-metallic Chemistry ."
Next , organize an array of parabolic radar projecting dishes so that the common focus is upon the target tumor . Place lead apron with sizeable opening on patient between projectors and target . Project enough EM energy so that the organo-METALLICS heat up much more than the flesh in question . Moderate dosage to minimize collateral damage to patient .
As you can see , I definitely thought of this before . I actually researched it for years .
Alright , keep up the positive criticism . What doesn't kill me , only makes me stronger !......P.M.
-
the organo-METALLICS heat up much more than the flesh
The best known organometallic in the world is probably tetraethyl lead.
It's a colourless liquid.
It doesn't absorb em radiation very well- generally not as well as water- so why do you think using organometallics will help?
Is there something magical about CAPITAL letters?
organize an array of parabolic radar projecting dishes so that the common focus is upon the target tumor .
Why bother?
You can't focus radiation down to a point much smaller than the wavelength- so, that's about two feet.
As you can see , I definitely thought of this before . I actually researched it for years .
Not very hard.
-
Say , how's about those newer low-intensity X-Rays ? One from the top , one from the side , and ya got the little buggers !
Low intensity won't kill anything, but might induce more cancers. We've been doing multi-beam megavoltage therapy for about the last 100 years, and recently have got very good at it with the cyberknife (up to 2000 separate beams) , but you still have the problem: by the time you have symptoms, you probably have secondary tumors which may be too small to detect. .
-
Cancer Fighters - You can use da lead , I be usin' everyting but ! As far as the aperture goes , please review the classic "Double Slit" experiment . I am not trying to focus , simply to soak the target . Also , radar not be cancer-causing , unlike hard radiation . Finally , I can do without any shroud at all , it's just to help prevent hyperthermia . The organo-metallic compounds can be bound to nutrients , or bodily hormones that the cancer cells uptake , and taken steadily low-dose . The radar will pass through the human tissue , heating it mildly , but heating the metals accumulated in the tumors much more . This will cause great mortality among the cancer cells . This would work even for unseen micro-tumors , as long as that area was also irradiated .
Alright , cheap cancer treatment . Add in the hot/cold needle (thermal ! ), and you've got an excellent augment to the standard treatment regime .
Hope you see it , Eye B. Happy .
....................................................P.M.
-
Clarification
Cancer cell uptake - Cancer cells are , by their nature , voracious , and almost predatory . To survive in a mortally competitive environment , they shirk their natural barriers and protective mechanisms . This is why chemo-therapy is effective against them . Immunotherapy and oncophage therapy also take advantage of this vulnerability .
Okay , explained the trick .........P.M
-
Dearest professor,
While I am happy to defer to you regarding matters of astronomy, this is a topic for which I feel entirely comfortable to call BS when I see it. As others in this thread have mentioned, it is quite easy to kill cancer--the trick lies in having great enough selectivity to kill the cancer while leaving healthy cells alone.
Certain types of cancer are easier than others to select for chemically, like some types of breast, ovarian, and colon cancers. However, others are not so easy to target. Merely going after "voracious" cells is likely to kill liver, heart, skeletal muscle, skin, eyes, and hair (no one really cares about the last one, but the others are fairly important). Organometallic and metal-organic toxins are among the least selective (compared to purely organic compounds that are more similar to signaling molecules within the body, and can hijack our own biochemistry).
The cheapest and most effective anti-cancer regimens are all preventative. No smoking, limited alcohol, regular exercise, more veggies and less meat goes a long way. Vaccination against HPV prevents almost all cervical cancer, and knowledge of certain genetic markers or family histories allows people to be extra cautious about certain risk factors (I have a family history of melanomas, so I limit exposure to direct sun, avoid certain skincare products, and get an annual mole check).
Another final (pedantic) point. "Cancer" comes in so many different flavors that it really shouldn't all be labelled under one umbrella term. It's about as diverse a category as "infection." There will never be a "cure for cancer" just as there will never be a "cure for war."
-
To : ChiralSPO
From : Prof. Meg.
I likewise defer to your specialist medical knowledge . I think we are both coming from a similar place ( emotionally ) on this issue . Whilst the difficulties you bring up are real , I have to believe that there are ways to get a higher level of some metals into some cancers . If this could be accomplished , a radar soak could actually induce very high temperatures in the indicated tumors . It might not be a cure , so much as a strong ( & cheap ) treatment .
The reason I propound the hot needle-bulb is because lasers are expensive , difficult to use , invasive/traumatic , and , like hard radiation , leave a significant amount of cancer in the treated area . I am seeking treatments that are both cheap , and easy to use . These could be applied regularly , to keep small tumors from becoming large enough to do serious harm yet they wouldn't damage the patient themselves . As you alluded to , precisely locating these is a challenge , but , if the patient is frequently getting the "cheap" version , with minimum X-ray exposure , any "mini" that slips by on one session , will be caught on the next .
This approach is similar to having infantry on the battlefield alongside tanks . It is a great force multiplier .
I welcome your feedback , and hope that we can make a dent together ...............................P.M.
-
but heating the metals accumulated in the tumors much more .
Why do you think tumours will accumulate metal?
Why do you think that metal will absorb more em radiation even though I already pointed out that they will not?
-
To:Bored Chemist
Cancer cells absorb all kinds of mess . Most of the techniques for treating cancer count on this .
As for metals being heated by RF ; go ahead and throw some aluminum-foil in your microwave oven . Let me know how that turns out .
Lastly , to scientifically compare RF heating of metal vs flesh , make two 6 ft. radio antennas ; one of metal , one of flesh . Compare their receptions .
Let me know how THAT turns out also !
Okay , eyes drying now ! ...........P.M
-
As for metals being heated by RF ; go ahead and throw some aluminum-foil in your microwave oven . Let me know how that turns out .
Lastly , to scientifically compare RF heating of metal vs flesh , make two 6 ft. radio antennas ; one of metal , one of flesh . Compare their receptions .
Let me know how THAT turns out also !
That is a property of bulk metals. Organometallic compounds will react no differently than any other molecules.
They will absorb x-rays more effectively than ordinary organic molecules (because these have to do with electronic transitions in the core shells of the atoms), but to absorb RF, they will need to be conductive on a scale many, many, many orders of magnitude larger than a molecule. Perhaps one could use conductive nanoparticles to heat areas selectively, but at that point the particles would need to be as big as or larger than the cells that they are targeting, so there would be no selectivity beyond physically putting them in a tumor, which we can already do with other cheaper and less dangerous methods.
-
"Things that make ya go hmmm!"
This is the point where I say " I'll have to get back with you on that ." Next , I scrape for time to research organo-metallics in solution . Then I come back and say " hasn't been done like that .", and you say " I'll commandeer my work section , and do it for the good of humanity!
Right ?
Okeley-dokeley !.............P.M.
-
To the researchers .
*The model being expounded here is that of a Faraday-Cage ; it is mostly empty space with thinly-spread metals interspersed throughout it , but that is quite adequate for it to effectively blockade rf. waves .
It may be unduly difficult to facilitate significant organo-metallic concentration in tumors at this time . An easier approach might be to induce high uptake and concentration of radar-reflective metals . This would allow for pin-pointing of micro-tumors , where-upon the hot-bulb needle could be used to cook them in-situ .
The hard part here is locating the radar scattering regions in the patient's body . This is where the research & development comes in .
At any rate , it is an unexplored pathway , definitely worth developing to maximum potential .
Okay , found path , you walk now !
...................................P.M.
-
Suggestion
Start by examining Thorotrast - Thorium Dioxide .
Although discontinued long ago , the administration of Thorotrast provided extremely fine X-ray images for delicate work . A good , but safe substitute , could easily be used with ordinary X-ray imaging to pinpoint nascent malignancies for hot-bulb needle burn-out .
Okay , Research City !........P.M.
-
They now use barium sulphate for an xray contrast medium. It does the same job that thorotrast did, without being carcinogenic.
What do you propose to do with it?
The way they commonly use it is to stick it up your backside before xraying you.
How do you feel this will help trat cancer?
-
My goal is to obtain a pathway to extremely high micro-tumor visibility , done easily and cheaply . Combined with the low-tech cryo-needle, this could mean affordable, and constant , micro-tumor elimination . Since tumors create most metastasis , this would be a positive feedback loop . Patients could live out a quality , normal-length life , affordably .
Otay , you got's it !..................P.M.
-
My goal is to obtain a pathway to extremely high micro-tumor visibility , done easily and cheaply . Combined with the low-tech hot-needle, this could mean affordable, and constant , micro-tumor elimination . Since tumors create most metastasis , this would be a positive feedback loop . Patients could live out a quality , normal-length life , affordably .
Otay , you got's it !..................P.M.
OK.
How would barium sulphate or thorotrast help with that?
-
There are thousands of metals and metal compounds which could potentially be bound to glucose , other nutrients , or hormones that cancer cells constantly uptake . Concentrated in tumors , these metals would be opaque to even low-dose X-rays . One frontal X-ray would reveal any tumors , a side X-ray would determine depth if there were any .
Cheap & easy is the ticket !.....P.M.
-
There are thousands of metals and metal compounds which could potentially be bound to glucose , other nutrients , or hormones that cancer cells constantly uptake .
And they are also taken up by healthy cells.
What you seem not to understand is that cancer cells are very very similar to healthy ones- especially in the early stages of development.
-
The Fermentation Pathway which cancer cells are forced to use , means that 40% of new cell mass is made of amino acids , lipids , and exosomes that they appropriate from their environment. MIT is already using this "Warburg Effect" to slip chemo -therapeutic drugs into them . Gold nano-particles, or other metals , might also be absorbed. The issue is radar opacity. It needs to be enough for low-dose X-rays .
Alright , critique away .......P.M.
-
A seductively promising approach is to use boron activation. We design a molecule that is preferentially taken up by a tumor, load it with boron, infiltrate, then irradiate the patient with thermal neutrons. Boron captures neutrons and emits α particles which have a range in tissue of about one cell diameter, so rip the tumor apart with minimal damage to healthy tissue.
This procedure has been used to treat gliomas but is very much a last-ditch approach to a very aggressive enemy, with all sorts of unpleasant side-effects and a huge capital cost of producing a reasonably clean beam of neutrons uncontaminated with γ rays. First, you build a nuclear reactor....then it gets complicated.
-
To the Nuclear Medicals
Make no mistake , I do give the medical professionals , and oncologists a ton of credit . Their work is incredibly demanding , and the emotional burdens involved stunningly heavy . I cannot touch that level of expertise , but instead seek to use inventiveness to create crude , cheap , and easy ways to help the fight against cancer . My idea is to continuously whittle down the cancer , and keep it barely extant for the full life of the patient . A trace population of cells will have neglegible mutation , and consequently , neglegible malignancy and metastasis . I am using thermal radiation because of it's absolute local eradication rate . It is a sledgehammer , not a ball-peen hammer ,thus it cannot be as target-specific , so the question must be asked ; what cost victory ?
.....................P.M.
-
I cannot touch that level of expertise , but instead seek to use inventiveness to create crude , cheap , and easy ways to help the fight against cancer .
We already have those, and we are looking to do better.
-
We ares on the same page
Maestro ! Let me know if you want
any medical derivations !....P.M.
-
You seem to be on the page behind; you are looking for 20th c cancer cures, but we are in the 21st c.
-
Time to give a listen to :
Pink Floyd - Money !
Noo one said it better !.....P.M.
-
To : Alancalverd
If you are already loading up
cancer cells with Boron ( a great
radar absorbant ) , why not also
give the tumors a good radar ( .5
gigahertz ) soak ? Most of the EM
will pass through the body , doing
nothing harmful to it , but the cells
with boron in them will heat up
and die ! This could be done body-
wide , no focusing involved , for
relatively low cost . Again , what
cost victory ?...........P.M.
-
Most of the EM
will pass through the body ,
The body will absorb 0.5 Ghz radiation quite well. Enough power to damage cancer cells inside the body will certainly damage surface tissues etc.
If you are already loading up
cancer cells with Boron
You are not.
You are loading them with borates.
If your enthusiasm was coupled with knowledge it would be much more productive.
-
Boron Neutron Capture Therapy
This is the crux of the matter . My awesome knowledge can be verified with WIKIPEDIA ! This includes both BNCT & Stealth chemistry . Add in detailed knowledge of military experience with massive radar irradiation , & you have a recipe for a break-through ! Now then ; BORON has an extremely large radar cross-section .This means that a radar dosage that simply warms human tissue , will raise the boron-containing compounds to a burning-hot temperature . Ergo, cell & tumor death .
Lastly , since radar does not kill by secondary radiation , a much more effective element (Gadolinium) can be used. If you doubt , ask Alancalverd , he's got this one . Alright , how do you like me now ?....P.M.
-
Boron is still not the same as borate.
-
To be or not to be boron .
To : Mr. The Operation Was A Success But The Patient Died .
The boronophenylalanine , and Sodium borocaptate , that you speak of contain BORON-10 . So do the Boron-containing nano-particles in the drug mixtures .
My bicycle-flattening cranium is now way too heavy . Daaamit ! PM
-
Riddle me this "Professor":
Phosphorus is extremely toxic (lethal doses are in the range of 1 gram) and spontaneously combusts in air--and our bodies typically contain just shy of 1 kg of phosphorus. So why don't we poison ourselves and burst into flame?
~An actual professor
-
Spontaneous Human Combustion !
I KNEW the Gus thing was a secret NASA experiment gone wrong ! Daaaaaamiit !!
.........................................P.M.
-
The boronophenylalanine , and Sodium borocaptate , that you speak of contain BORON-10 . So do the Boron-containing nano-particles in the drug mixtures .
And those compounds have large neutron capture cross sections.
Why do you think they absorb microwaves better than, for example, proteins or water?
-
(lethal doses are in the range of 1 gram)
You may find that's enough to kill 10 people.
-
Microwave Efficacy
A.- Pure proteins : lousy . Try dry leather .
B.- Water : good . I eat .
C.- Metals : all hell breaks loose !
Dude , you're water !.........P.M.
-
Microwave Efficacy
A.- Pure proteins : lousy . Try dry leather .
B.- Water : good . I eat .
C.- Metals : all hell breaks loose !
Dude , you're water !.........P.M.
As you say, we are mainly water and it absorbs microwaves quite well.
Why do you think those boron compounds absorb microwaves better than, for example, proteins or water?
-
We are Devo ( seawater ? ).
Saltwater ( us ) is conductive , but Silver is over 10 million times as conductive . Conductivity is the main determinant of RFabsorption. A heavy radar dose will superheat the absorbed silver , without over-heating the exposed flesh & blood. Since calcium is a conductor , the bones would require angled shielding , & short-pulse dosing . The bonus there is the potential for bone cancer treatment . Maxing out the dosages for silver , gold , copper , & aluminum , would help avoid metals poisoning . Monthly outpatient visits for your " doses " could suppress cancer for life . Okay , got to take care of that water thing !........P.M.
-
Since calcium is a conductor
Calcium is a conductor. But calcium phosphate- which is present in bones is an insulator.
It's a bit like the borate/ boron thing you don't understand.
Conductivity is the main determinant of RFabsorption.
Well- sort of.
Mirrors are generally made of metals. They don't absorb em radiation, they reflect it.
A heavy radar dose will superheat the absorbed silver
If that was true (and it isn't) then it would only be useful if we could paint the cancer silver. If you can do that, why not just remove it?
Is there anything else you would like to be utterly wrong about before you answer the questions people have put to you like
Why do you think those boron compounds absorb microwaves better than, for example, proteins or water?
and Phosphorus is extremely toxic (lethal doses are in the range of 1 gram) and spontaneously combusts in air--and our bodies typically contain just shy of 1 kg of phosphorus. So why don't we poison ourselves and burst into flame?
How would barium sulphate or thorotrast help with that?
why do you think using organometallics will help?
and so on?
-
Tuning Your Instrument
The calcium phosphate issue is a good thing . Easier to avoid over-heating a bone . The conductive metals I mentioned can introduced in many forms , including nano-particles , for maximum ANTENNA effect ( RF loves antennas ) . If the silver ( et.al )nano-PARTICLES (not -phates) are strongly irradiated , that 10 million times conductivity WILL cause them to absorb RF , & heat way up , just like hi-powered transmitter antennas do . Since they will be inside invisible micro-tumors , this will kill those tumors sight unseen ( & unpainted too ) .
Okay , it's time for YOU to stand in front of a large EAW radar, or grab a radio station's antenna , and tell me that RF doesn't make for some serious heat . I'm just proposing a way to concentrate it , for medical purposes .
Alright , I await w/baited breath !.P
-
Okay , it's time for YOU to stand in front of a large EAW radar,
Well, OK, as long as I can hide behind a piece of metal- which will reflect (and not absorb) the radiation.
That's how radar works. Planes- made of metal- reflect the radar signal.
But, until you can explain how you plan to paint the tumours silver, it doesn't matter a fig anyway.
-
They do both , especially at RF wavelengths . Human tissue , how ever , is fairly transparent to UHF . This is the difference I am trying to take advantage of . Point-in-case ; the Early Warning Radar example . If you actually do it , you will find that it harmlessly warms you up , strongly and evenly . Medi-vac units could use it to both hypo-thermal , and shock . Any pennies in your pockets would get real hot though !
Finally , the tumors are " painted " from the inside . They absorb the silver as they assimilate the organo-metallic compounds they hoover up , to enable their run-away reproduction . Their gluttony guarantees that they will have far more silver in their composition than healthy cells .
Alright , " Prof. " Nye says bye !..P.
-
They absorb the silver as they assimilate the organo-metallic compounds they hoover up , to enable their run-away reproduction
And again...
Why would tumour cells accumulate organometallics?
If you have some magic mechanism for getting them to consume some particular material. Then you can just add a toxin to that material and save mucking about with RF.
-
Poison vs Heat
The magic formula is called BNCT.
It spot-delivers the metal Boron .
The secondary radiation produced
does not kill all of the cancer cells
present , neither would targeted
drug delivery . Only cooking the
tumor thoroughly would do this .
The Hot-Needle is designed to do
this , so is Hot-Spot Therapy .
They could be complementary to
each other , or to immunotherapy
and other treatments .
Alright , enough mucking around .
Somebody do this , and save a million lives !..........P.M.
-
It spot-delivers the metal Boron .
Given that boron is not a metal, should I trust the rest of what you say?Only cooking the
tumor thoroughly would do this .
But it would also destroy surrounding tissue.
Nothing of what you have said in this thread is new.
And none of it is realistically aan improvement on what we have.
All you have done is add a few misunderstandings.
-
Boron
Refractory Metalloid
Technically a Non-Metal
Used in high-temperature , high-strength industrial components . In practice , Boron makes a better metal than many " Metals " .
Your argument is " nit-picky " , like the cancer therapies I seek to augment . No hard feelings , but you walked right into that one !
When it comes to surrounding tissue , that is where metastasis hides , most often . Again I ask ; What price victory ?
Your reprise ?...........P.M.
-
You have answered your own question
What price victory ?
The Operation Was A Success But The Patient Died .
In practice , Boron makes a better metal than many " Metals " .
No.
But it hardly matters.
What have you said that is new?
You have gone on about boron- without understanding that it's not actually used as such.
You have gone on about metals- without realising that they reflect radio waves, rather than absorbing them.
And you have gone on about silver- without offering any clue as to how you might use it (not that it would matter since you are wrong about interaction with EM radiation).
So, what you have said is "if we can magically attach something to cancer cells that is bad for them by some mechanism (like absorbing RF strongly), then we can treat cancer".
Ture, but hardly progress.
-
When it comes to surrounding tissue , that is where metastasis hides ,
wrong. A classic case is a bowel adenoma - often treatable - that metastasises to the brain and kills you. Or breast mets turning up in the spine.
-
Chess Match
Let us concentrate on the top four conductors . All have been used for decades as electrical mediums for decades . Receiving antennas can use any good electrical conductor . The RF waves cause the conductor's electrons to move in sync with them . Large move-men's require a ground . Consider the human body ( salt-water sea ) to be an adequate ground for tiny currents . Rapidly changing electrical currents heat their conductor,ergo "HotSpotTherapy".
Silver, et al , have been used in the human body for many years . The trick here is to bind them into the cancer cell's food . Powerful RF should then do the job .
You know , I swear I smell electrical insulation burning !..P.M.
-
Alancalverd
Metastasis may be a misnomer . I am referring to the physical spread of the cancer to nearby tissues .
One note here ; the proposed approach would kill all of the cancer cells , spread throughout the body , equally well . Blocked by bone would be the only exception . A different strategy is needed for that .
Hokay , dinner-time . I'm feeling peckish all of a sudden !....P.M.
-
Let us concentrate on the top four conductors .
Why?
It doesn't matter how often you ignore the fact, good conductors reflect radio waves- that's how radar works.
-
Hokay , dinner-time . I'm feeling peckish all of a sudden !....P.M.
After dinner, you can see if you have an answer for this- which you ignored earlier.
What have you said that is new?
You have gone on about boron- without understanding that it's not actually used as such.
You have gone on about metals- without realising that they reflect radio waves, rather than absorbing them.
And you have gone on about silver- without offering any clue as to how you might use it (not that it would matter since you are wrong about interaction with EM radiation).
So, what you have said is "if we can magically attach something to cancer cells that is bad for them by some mechanism (like absorbing RF strongly), then we can treat cancer".
True, but hardly progress.
-
Conductors
They do both . I don't care about the reflected RF , only the absorbed portion . If you've ever accidentally
put metal in a microwave oven , you saw sparks . The absorbed RF caused induced currents , showing that indeed , conductors do absorb & reflect RF radiation . The silver that was snuck into the cancer cells will absorb some of the radar energy , and rise in temperature as a result . Even your light-mirror absorbs a little of the EM it sees , it too , gains in temperature .
Okay , hot tumors die . Yaaay !..P.
-
, only the absorbed portion
Then why do you insist on choosing something where the absorbed fraction is small?
Do you not realise that metals are shiny?
Even your light-mirror absorbs a little of the EM it sees
And, in many cases the glass in front of it absorbs more .
So, by analogy, in order to heat the cancer cells up to kill then, you would need to char the healthy cells in the way.
By the way, you keep missing this bit
What have you said that is new?
You have gone on about boron- without understanding that it's not actually used as such.
You have gone on about metals- without realising that they reflect radio waves, rather than absorbing them.
And you have gone on about silver- without offering any clue as to how you might use it (not that it would matter since you are wrong about interaction with EM radiation).
So, what you have said is "if we can magically attach something to cancer cells that is bad for them by some mechanism (like absorbing RF strongly), then we can treat cancer".
Ture, but hardly progress.
-
Shiny , happy people !
Absorption/Reflection ratios vary greatly depending upon many physical variables . Take a naturally reflective metal , melt it into a contiguous panel , polish said panel , fasten a flat panel of polished glass to it , and voila ! One shiny , happy mirror !
Barring this configuration , you will have a far more absorptive form of the indicated conductors .
Considering the massively lesser conductivity of the involved flesh , the metal will get burning hot long before the adjacent flesh chars .
The duration of exposure will determine how far from the tumor the high heat spreads .
Alright , process explained . Out , out , damned spot !.......P.M.
-
the metal will get burning hot long before the adjacent flesh chars .
You keep saying that.
It keeps not being true.
Barring this configuration ,
You do realise that's the most conductive configuration, don't you?
You are arguing against yourself there.
Metals do a bad job of absorbing EM radiation in the RF/ µwave regions of the spectrum.
Nothing you say will stop that being true.
You missed this bit again.
Please try to answer it.
What have you said that is new?
You have gone on about boron- without understanding that it's not actually used as such.
You have gone on about metals- without realising that they reflect radio waves, rather than absorbing them.
And you have gone on about silver- without offering any clue as to how you might use it (not that it would matter since you are wrong about interaction with EM radiation).
So, what you have said is "if we can magically attach something to cancer cells that is bad for them by some mechanism (like absorbing RF strongly), then we can treat cancer".
True, but hardly progress.
-
The mystery of electricity
This is not a straightforward absorption of RF radiation , although diamagnetics such as Boron are often used in radar absorbing materials . It is really a technique to induce electrical currents in conducting particles concentrated in a lossy medium ( flesh ) . The powerful , alternating , RF field will cause said particles to experience electron migration , and the semi-conducting body to act as a ground for the micro-currents . Done correctly , the conducting particle & associated ground material will heat up preferentially , from inherent electrical resistance . This process is extremely site specific . The trick is minimizing conductor accum-ulation anywhere but in the tumors .
To simplify here , you make an incandescent bulb filament out of a cancer tumor . The thermal heat released will cook every cell in the very immediate vicinity .
Alrighty then ! Cigarette lighter to the tumor . Yowch !.....P.M.
-
This is not a straightforward absorption of RF radiation
No, it's not. It is a straightforward reflection.
Which is why it won't be absorbed, so it won't cause heating.
Boron are often used in radar absorbing materials .
You still haven't understood the difference between boron and borates.
The powerful , alternating , RF field will cause said particles to experience electron migration ,
That's only going to work if the size of the conductors s such as to provide resonance.
You talked about using 0.5GHz
Resonance at that frequency needs a conductor about 2 feet long.
This process is extremely site specific .
Yeah, right, You can target any half metre section of the patient you want to burn.
-
Boron Nano-particles
PARTICLES , not boro-silicates , not boron oxides , just Boron . It is one of a multitude of non-ferrous materials which will generate strong eddy-currents in the presence of a powerful, alternating electro-magnetic field ( RADAR ) .
It is used in compound as a tumor indicator . This could be an integral part of the Hot-Needle therapy .
The EM resonance you mention is not necessary here . This is not tuning a radio , simply applying an EM force to push some electrons back & forth . Brute force , not efficiency , is required here .
Finally , the target will be the entire patient , but the burn will be where the highly conductive materials (likely metals) are concentrated .
Example:Place a small ball of aluminum on top of a Pot-pie . Place in microwave oven&turn on. Tell Ol' Perfessor what burned !
Wah haha haha ! I feel like Doctor Fu__enstein today ! Always did like P. Funk. !............P.M.
-
PARTICLES , not boro-silicates , not boron oxides , just Boron . It is one of a multitude of non-ferrous materials which will generate strong eddy-currents in the presence of a powerful, alternating electro-magnetic field
A couple of points.
(1) Boron is a poor conductor- so you won't get large currents through it easily.
(2) using small particles of materials reduced eddy currents- the fact is used commercially.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_core#Powdered_metals
Also, you still haven't explained how you plan to get these materials into the cancer (but not the surrounding tissue)
-
Passive Tumor Accumulation
N.C.I. has made great progress with this family of techniques , and are steadily advancing with active versions as well . These therapies place " nano-scale devices " INTO the tumor cells . Some larger tumors are still difficult to get NSDs into . These are prime cand-itates for Hot-Needle Therapy .
Experimentation will determine which materials are best for which situation . The body itself will put the NSDs in the tumors , but not the surrounding , healthy tissue .
Okay ! Boron:Locator, Silver:Heat, EAW Radar:Process Driver .
Ya got it now , right Fred ?
Yippy !........P.M.
-
Passive Tumor Accumulation
So, what you are saying is that we should continue to do something which is already being done.
True, but hardly worth posting.
Example:Place a small ball of aluminum on top of a Pot-pie . Place in microwave oven&turn on. Tell Ol' Perfessor what burned !
Try doing that underwater.
(Or, roughly equivalently, try wrapping the foil + pipe in stake, then microwaving it.)
The steak burns first.
Did you somehow think that was a good thing?
Also, you keep missing this bit
What have you said that is new?
You have gone on about boron- without understanding that it's not actually used as such.
You have gone on about metals- without realising that they reflect radio waves, rather than absorbing them.
And you have gone on about silver- without offering any clue as to how you might use it (not that it would matter since you are wrong about interaction with EM radiation).
So, what you have said is "if we can magically attach something to cancer cells that is bad for them by some mechanism (like absorbing RF strongly), then we can treat cancer".
True, but hardly progress.
-
The Imprecise Analogy
The foil-ball analogy must be done in air , because microwaves are absorbed by water far more quickly than .4 to .5 gigahertz UHF waves. They never make it through the steak to the foil .
The Boron is to FIND the tumors , that is how it is presently used . The point of accumulating metals in the cancer cells is to use EMR to induce eddy currents . THESE are what heat the NSDs & surrounding tissues .
Okay , I think the preposition is now outstandingly clear ........P.M.
-
Okay , I think the preposition is now outstandingly clear ........P.M.
LOL
preposition
ˌprɛpəˈzɪʃ(ə)n/Submit
noun GRAMMAR
a word governing, and usually preceding, a noun or pronoun and expressing a relation to another word or element in the clause, as in ‘the man on the platform’, ‘she arrived after dinner’, ‘what did you do it for ?’.
proposition
prɒpəˈzɪʃ(ə)n/Submit
noun
1.
a statement or assertion that expresses a judgement or opinion.
"the proposition that high taxation is undesirable"
synonyms: theory, hypothesis, thesis, argument, premise, postulation, theorem, concept, idea, statement
microwaves are absorbed by water far more quickly than .4 to .5 gigahertz UHF waves. They never make it through the steak to the foil .
lot of the UHF doesn't make it through either...
http://file.scirp.org/Html/2-9801182/a2f0db40-3590-4a87-b3a9-fd8a46ce9b6b.jpg
So. What would really happen- rather than what you want to magically happen- is that a lot of the UHF would be absorbed on the way to the tumour, it would bounce off the metal you (magically) put there and then some more of it would be absorbed on the way back.
About half the time the tumour will be hidden behind the magic metal so only the healthy tissue would be cooked.
The Boron is to FIND the tumors , that is how it is presently used
Not really- the rest of the boron-doped molecule finds the tumour.
The boron is the "payload"- when it's exposed to slow neutrons it releases a lot of energy and fries the cancer.
The point of accumulating metals in the cancer cells
You have yet to explain how you propose to do this.
use EMR to induce eddy currents
Which, for small particles, will not happen.
And, once again
What have you said that is new?
You have gone on about boron- without understanding that it's not actually used as such.
You have gone on about metals- without realising that they reflect radio waves, rather than absorbing them.
And you have gone on about silver- without offering any clue as to how you might use it (not that it would matter since you are wrong about interaction with EM radiation).
So, what you have said is "if we can magically attach something to cancer cells that is bad for them by some mechanism (like absorbing RF strongly), then we can treat cancer".
True, but hardly progress.
-
My Advertisement
The preposition was relating this treatment to cancer therapy .
Now , at 400 to 500 megahertz , ~ 50% of the UHF signal makes it all of the way through a very obese patient . Source : Int'l Journal of the Society for Underwater Tech. Volume 27 , 2007 .
Next , the UHF waves will not bounce off of nano-particles . They are 1000 times too small . Look up " skin-depths " for conductive metals .
Next , Boron imaging is completely seperate from BNCT . Ergo , this treatment uses boron independently from any neutrons . Ref : Journal of Clinical Cancer Research ; MRI-Boron Imaging .
I already clarified the role of the conducting NSDs ( gold , silver , copper , etc.) in converting RF energy into electric eddy-currents . The constant back&forth flow of these causing resistive heat to be created & dispersed around the conducting NSDs .
Okay , cancer-cooking machine !
.......P.M.
-
I believe the reason they do not do the burning with the laser is the reason they do not put patients under the knife, damage to vital organs asd systems, and death of the patient during surgery. Key hole surgery is less invasive. The idea of radiotherapy is to allow the body to recover from the cancer gradually, although radiotherapy is limited in the ammound adminiterable, due to radiation. Chemotherapy and surgery carry significant health penalies of there own.
-
...........Competing Therapies
You are so right , Mr. Chemicals ! Those effects are why I spent a quarter-century honing the "Thermo-therapy" approach . With it , the patient can visit the Out-patient clinic occasionally , for their harmless radar-bath ! Sure beats poison , don't it !.....P.M.
-
I already clarified the role of the conducting NSDs ( gold , silver , copper , etc.) in converting RF energy into electric eddy-currents . The constant back&forth flow of these causing resistive heat to be created & dispersed around the conducting NSDs .
How many times do I have to explain to you that small particles do not produce eddy current heating?
It's a well known fact, exploited in so called "iron dust" cores in HF transformers etc.
-
Next , the UHF waves will not bounce off of nano-particles . They are 1000 times too small . Look up " skin-depths " for conductive metals .
OK, let's have a look at some skin depths. Here's a handy calculator
https://www.pasternack.com/t-calculator-skin-depth.aspx
for copper at 500 MHz the skin depth is 2.9µm
For Aluminium at 200 KHz the skin depth is 180µm
Ordinary cooking foil is about 16µm thick- less than a tenth of the skin depth.
So, by your "logic" it can't reflect long wave radio signals at 200KHz
Get a radio, tune in to radio 4 on long wave, and wrap the radio in foil.
You will discover that thin (i.e. much less than the wavelength or the skin depth) foils still reflect radio waves.
-
Sure beats poison , don't it !.....P.M.
No, because it won't actually work.
-
Alright , Mr. Chemist . I'll mount an even more thorough research regime . This could take quite a while , as there is a paucity of data on the behaviors of nano-particles in RF fields . My personal bet is that there is a way to heat them up, but proving it will be a bear . Easier if I had a lab ......P.
-
Alright , Mr. Chemist . I'll mount an even more thorough research regime . This could take quite a while , as there is a paucity of data on the behaviors of nano-particles in RF fields . My personal bet is that there is a way to heat them up, but proving it will be a bear . Easier if I had a lab ......P.
You could hardly mount a less thorough research regime than simply ignoring reality.
Just a suggestion: rather than engaging in your own research, why not start from the basis of someone else's research?
Perhaps you could start by considering the fact that I have done lots of reading on this sort of thing.
Incidentally, you might be interested to know that the black pigment in black + white photographs is , in fact, nanoparticulate silver.
Pictures are not noted for blocking radio transmissions.
-
Absorption is what I'm after .
The aluminum reflection/skin depth issue is affected by the Al. being contiguous .
The effect I'm after could also be responsivery to "Virtual" effects , that is ; groups of seperate particles acting somewhat like a chunk , or a surface . There are a tremendous # of variables to play with here . It's doubtful that any-one's done it all . It really calls for a dedicated research project . Even BNCT wasn't born in a day .
.........P.M.
-
Absorption is what I'm after .
And it is the exact opposite of what you get .
Do you understand that reflection and absorption are mutually exclusive?
So, why have you picked "shiny things" to do your absorption for you?
-
It's a percentage thing . Beside those are very different on the nano-scale , and with rough surfaces .
Even if it's all reflecting , a collection of particles will increase the local Faraday Cage effect .
See what I mean about variables ?
P.M.
-
I think really mega mind you can group hot probe in with surgery, it will have similar effects.
What you need to ask is why are even opperable cancers (eg lung ) not surgically removed. I have asked myself that question. I have found the over riding answer is it disturbes the cancer through the lymph node system. People have there lymph node system removed, but this is an extremley invasive and hard operation that has serious concequences for the long term future.
Some cancers do not respond to dna disruption in radio therapy.
Some do not respond to chemotherapy.
-
.......I agree without agreeing .
At first glance ( & even 2nd ) , the effects might seem similar , BUT... radiotherapy uses radiation and secondary radiation to kill SOME of the tumor cells. It causes collateral damage , and leaves cancer cells in the target area ALIVE ! Chemotherapy uses poisons that preferentially kill cancer cells . This is worse in most regards !
Surgery is so invasive & damaging that it shoots live cancer cells into the circulatory & lymphatic systems !
All three of the above sicken/kill the patient , while cancer cells party in the targeted areas !
My proposal prevents ANY of the above ! It kills 100% of the cells in the targeted areas ; either by NSD & radar soak , or by Thermal Hot Needle . This is because cooked meat is dead , ALL of it ! The only dilemma is whether to pull the meatball out or not !
Collateral damage ? Initially a bit .
Repeat damage ? Almost none .
Quality of life for patient ? Great .
Life expectancy ? Indefinite .
Cost ? Ridiculously cheap .
Alright , win , win , win , for all the boys & girls , and grandfolks too !
Live long and prosper ..........P.M.
-
My proposal prevents ANY of the above
Liar.
Even by your own assertion, you simply have not done your homework. ...
I'll mount an even more thorough research regime .
-
Upset understandable .
I assume you're referring to damage . I don't mean it does none , I mean it doesn't do those particular forms ; hard radiation damage , chemical poisoning , spreading of live cancer cells into circulatory & lymphatic vessels . Of course there'd be a thin burn shell around the meatball , but no live cells to migrate out . THAT is the idea , at least .
Also , if you had important structures within , then you're SOL.
You will have to LIVE with that , but not die .......P.M.
-
Well is that not keyhole quarterisation and extraction megamind ?
Start a new thread in the biology forum, there are better qualified there than I !
-
...........Keyhole Cauterisation
Imprecise and sloppy , especially if done with laser . Also gives cancer cells opportunity to be drawn into aforetomentioned vessels .
I really need intermediaries , since I'm not a biologist . I also need experimenters , since I don't have one . Of course , if you spread the good word , it might generate enough interest to start the ball rolling !......P.M.
-
Even if it's all reflecting , a collection of particles will increase the local Faraday Cage effect .
And , in doing so, it will shield the cancer from damage.
Why do you want to do that?
-
I assume you're referring to damage .
No.
I am referring to the fact that a system, like yours, which doesn't actually work can't be used.
If it doesn't get used, it can't prevent anything.
-
I really need intermediaries , since I'm not a biologist . I also need experimenters , since I don't have one .
You really need to shut up until you have learned enough to say anything useful.
-
...... Positivity
Already said I'm not a biologist , just someone who can see two promising approaches . Definitely worth exploring and maximizing , unless having friends & relatives scream to death doesn't bother you .
P.M.
-
Medicine is my background, and it seems like the question is asking if fire can be used as a surgical tool to extract a presumed localised area of cancerous cells, right?
The "hot probe" term as a question is not in any medical journal for any type of medical or surgical process of treatment. So clearly the question is from where?
What I have learnt in my work in Medicine/Surgery is that "Surgery" is what it is, it goes in there to fix catastrophic sudden injuries or long-standing issues that need sudden intervention, and "Medicine" is more holistic, more about the overall holistic operation of the body, the organs, tissues, associated circulatory regulatory and hormonal systems that depend highly on how the body interacts with the environment regarding food and air.
-
Medicine is my background, and it seems like the question is asking if fire can be used as a surgical tool to extract a presumed localised area of cancerous cells, right?
The "hot probe" term as a question is not in any medical journal for any type of medical or surgical process of treatment....
As far as I am aware hot wire loops are used for removal of some cancers and diseased tissue eg TURPS for prostate and loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP), or large loop excision of the transformation zone (LLETZ) for abnormal cervical cells. It has the advantage of being cauterising.
-
You quoted me, what's your point? I know what hot wire loops are, but hot probes is something the author of this thread needs to address, right? If you read the opening statement of this subject there's a sense of "why bother" with anything hot. Did you not read that?
-
just someone who can see two promising approaches
Really, What are they?
Because what you have suggested so far aren't promising.
-
As I mentioned way back, we already use "hot needles" and indeed cold needles, to destroy small tumors that can be identified and localised. But there are umpteen varieties of cancer - at least as many as of healthy cells - which turn up in all sorts of awkward places, with all sorts of different metabolisms, so there is no single trick that will kill them all without harming surrounding healthy tissue or causing the primary to distribute itself through the body's umpteen pathways.
-
Excellent , my man , excellent !
My fingers crossed on ever improving detection . The rf. bath is , of course , an ideal . Even partial results would be earth-shaking , and life saving ! There are many different ways to approach the problem , but in the end , materials testing is called for.
......P.M.
-
... hot probes is something the author of this thread needs to address, right? If you read the opening statement of this subject there's a sense of "why bother" with anything hot. Did you not read that?
I did read it, but wondered whether you had read any of the subsequent discussion. In the second post @alancalverd points out, as he reiterates above:
As I mentioned way back, we already use "hot needles" and indeed cold needles, to destroy small tumors that can be identified and localised.
Whether the point of those probes are hot wire, loops, or RF needles etc, the use of localised heat in cancer treatment is well established in the medical literature. However, the point of the ongoing discussion is the practicality and options for generalised treatment.
-
If we take a rather broad use of the word "hot" then boron / neutron based therapy is a hot probe too (as are radioactive needles).
None of that is new.
The novel bit of the thread seems to be the idea of getting lumps of metal into cancers and then heating them with RF.
The problem remains that metals don't usually absorb RF well.
The OP seems impervious to this fact.
There's also the problem of getting the "magic thing that absorbs RF" to localise in the tumours.
It's possible to some degree, but it's never going to be good enough to meet the requirements that the OP is suggesting.
In order to have a treatment where once a year you go to the clinic, take your magic pill and get zapped to remove any cancers before they are big enough to do any harm you need to meet two requirements
You must have some mechanism that targets all cancer cells (and as has been pointed out, there are at least as many different types of cancer cells as there are healthy ones,
You must have a mechanism that is so specific that you do no harm to any healthy cells- not least because you risk making them cancerous if you repeatedly stress them in this way.
If we could manage to meet the first requirement, which I doubt, then you would be putting enormous evolutionary pressure on the cancer cells to change so that they no longer absorb the magic potion. since cancers typically mutate a lot, there's practically no chance of having a treatment that works for long.
This whole thread is a pipedream, maintained by the OP's combination of ignorance and wishful thinking.
-
....................Evolution
Once a month , my man , monthly .
.........................and
Nutrients , they all need nutrients to stay alive .
.........................and
Evolution ; if you eliminate virtually all the cells , the rate of mutation drops to almost zero . Ditto the rate of metastasis .
.........................and
Pipedreams ; like the dream that my relatives were still alive .
...........................so
All in all , possibly another effective arrow in the quiver .
Let’s throw everything but the kitchen sink at it . I vote life !
.......P.M.
-
All in all , possibly another effective arrow in the quiver .
Which part of "no" don't you understand?
-
... hot probes is something the author of this thread needs to address, right? If you read the opening statement of this subject there's a sense of "why bother" with anything hot. Did you not read that?
I did read it, but wondered whether you had read any of the subsequent discussion. In the second post @alancalverd points out, as he reiterates above:
As I mentioned way back, we already use "hot needles" and indeed cold needles, to destroy small tumors that can be identified and localised.
Whether the point of those probes are hot wire, loops, or RF needles etc, the use of localised heat in cancer treatment is well established in the medical literature. However, the point of the ongoing discussion is the practicality and options for generalised treatment.
Indeed.
The point of the ongoing discussion should also take into consideration the stage of the cancer and thus how widespread it is. If you had read up re. cancers you would know they exist in different stages, from localised to grossly systemic. Using hot probes in early stage localised cancers can prove effective, yet systemic cancers would perhaps defer the idea of the hot probe given the effect it would have on the body in general.
-
....... .....Generalised Cancer
Yes , yes , yes ! The Two Prongs is the idea ! Knock down the bulk of it with smooth , gradually bulbous , cryo-needles . Mop up the micro-tumors with the Radar-NSD bath . Put the nail in the coffin with immunotherapy ! A lethal combination if ever there was one , metastasis will be all but eliminated ! The big hurdle is finding the right materials to make the NSDs from .
Alright , lab time !.......P.M. .
-
The point of the ongoing discussion should also take into consideration the stage of the cancer and thus how widespread it is. If you had read up re. cancers you would know they exist in different stages, from localised to grossly systemic.
I do know quite a bit about cancers. The ongoing discussion has already taken into account the different stages, as @Bored chemist says.
-
I think you misread me. The post is about a "probe". A "probe" is an instrument that "probes", it determines dimensions, it is executed as an exploratory exercise. Treatment is something else. Perhaps the post was misworded, however I can only call a spade a spade on this one and give the OP the benefit of the choice of words.