See this is what I've been talking about! Why has it taken so long for them to come up with this line of reasoning, and execution? I've been saying since this has started why must the treatment kill every fast growing cell? Why haven't we developed treatments to specifically target cancer cells? Well, at least I know now, that's where research is finally heading. Colleen, thanks for sending this along.

Other Thinks (4)
Kim,
That was a very encouraging interview, wasn't it? I wish better targeting had already come to pass, but am heartened to hear that's the trend.
XO, Colleen
Posted by Colleen | December 27, 2008 6:59 PM
Posted on December 27, 2008 18:59
Thanks for posting this, Kim. It's the future, and the future is here, and probably where most treatment will be headed. I think (though not certain) that DNA mapping had a lot to do with the current advances in target therapy. Can't happen quickly enough, though.
Posted by Teaberry | December 27, 2008 10:17 PM
Posted on December 27, 2008 22:17
In theory it's a good idea, and I guess the guy couldn't help but sound rather vague about how this is going to be accomplished, which in part answers your question about why they haven't done this sooner. I mean, it's taken this long just to understand the basic mechanisms of tumour formation and growth.
Heck, my surgeons told me that ten years ago someone with my diagnosis would have automatically been considered to be a terminal case. So it seems that things like this can only progress step by step as knowledge increases.
Anyhow, sure glad it's not ten years ago...
Posted by azahar | December 28, 2008 7:48 AM
Posted on December 28, 2008 07:48
Wow, this one almost sounds like science fiction stuff...
Nano device 'times drug release'
Posted by azahar | January 4, 2009 4:47 AM
Posted on January 4, 2009 04:47