Message from @Captain Conundrum
Discord ID: 686600540561735686
It function to a degree, but they can still be forced to die by some methods if they have not changed their protein structure to such a degree that it is no longer possible.
It's still lympathic action, not apoptosis
Signaled apoptosis doesn't work in cancer cells. That's why it's dangerous
If your body could induce apoptosis in cancer cells... then noone would die from it.
And cancer wouldn't really exist
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3197541/ <:smugon:512048583806025739>
@Malac Why am I finding so many papers about apoptosis in cancer that contradicts what you are saying?
Just because you have learned that apoptosis mean suicide does not change that it can be induced in many ways.
It is literally how the cell dies.
In some, the problem is due to too much apoptosis, such as in the case of degenerative diseases while in others, too little apoptosis is the culprit. Cancer is one of the scenarios where too little apoptosis occurs, resulting in malignant cells that will not die. The mechanism of apoptosis is complex and involves many pathways. Defects can occur at any point along these pathways, leading to malignant transformation of the affected cells, tumour metastasis and resistance to anticancer drugs. Despite being the cause of problem, apoptosis plays an important role in the treatment of cancer as it is a popular target of many treatment strategies. The abundance of literature suggests that targeting apoptosis in cancer is feasible. However, many troubling questions arise with the use of new drugs or treatment strategies that are designed to enhance apoptosis and critical tests must be passed before they can be used safely in human subjects.
Yes and? it says exactly what I've been saying all this time
That is the abstract to that paper, yes.
It's not apoptosis. They're inducing cell death through other means.
<:smugon:512048583806025739> using the mechanisms of apoptosis to induce cell death. But muh suicide reeeeeeeeeeee
Good luck getting a drug to do that, that won't also kill you
There is no programmed death. You're throwing extreme stressors at it until the cell cannot function and dies.
https://jcs.biologists.org/content/129/1/155 not apoptosis <:smugon:512048583806025739> https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/492306v1.full <:smugon:512048583806025739>
Whatever. We're arguing over definitions at this point.
You were arguing about it <:smugon:512048583806025739>
`Sixteen mice were used, eight injected with control cells and eight injected with NAF-1-suppressed cells. Mice weight and tumor size were measured throughout the duration of the experiment. Tumor areas were calculated according to the formula width×length.`
meh.
Small sample size.
<:smugon:512048583806025739>
@Captain Conundrum Let me guess. Physics?
@UnScottable bby <:smugon:512048583806025739> 💋 I agree <:smugon:512048583806025739>
@Malac College drop-out a long time ago
Even faggier
I don't disagree
Nevertheless I would still use radiation to induce apoptosis <:smugon:512048583806025739>
Whatever
Agree to disagree
I'm tired of arguing over it
I say it's not apoptosis because it's external stressors and isn't controlled by the body.
You say it's apoptosis because the cell is killed by stressors and is taken up by phagocytes.
Things just got serious...
https://twitter.com/SkyNewsBreak/status/1237034654508728323?s=20
@Malac Never got into the specifics about it <:smugon:512048583806025739> phagocytes does not have to eat the cells in order to be effective
No. But necrosis sucks doesn't it?
why would I blast ass the patient with tons of radiation <:smugon:512048583806025739> just give em a little constantly
Phagocytosis is necessary to prevent necrosis of destroyed tumor tissue
sure it does get rid of the tumours but that would get rid of many other things aswell.
Gr8 read https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0009279718311013 very noice