Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : Techniclone (TCLN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bob L who wrote (2668)	10/24/1998 8:25:00 PM
From: PDavid	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3702

Davis, I think your use of a name to identify a poster is inappropriate. There are reasons why people do not use their real names. It is their business. Its not right to attempt to identify anybody. Once people's names are out there, they can be contacted by a multitude of means, none of which may be desired by that person. You have chosen to use your name. Thats fine. But I think it is unfair to impose it upon another, no matter how much you hate somebody. If you disagree with somebody, then make it known. I can post a million things that you have said on the boards or to me personally, that have amounted to non-events. But don't try to bring slander upon somebody in the manner which you have done. You once accused me of killing this board, but what kills the board is when people become inhibited from posting, for fear that personal names will be used. We all have a right to privacy. Please try to respect that. PT

To: Bob L who wrote (2668)	10/25/1998 3:46:00 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3702

Thanks Bob, Like you, I'm way over my head, but we sink or swim, so I dog paddle as best I can. Maybe not graceful or fast, but too bad. Shero will have just clicked 'next' anyway, so no hurry. Nothing much reaches the inside of the large tumor mass, hence the growth of blood vessels and necrotic cells forming due to lack of oxygen [and I suppose nutrients] which is the happy circumstance for TNT which gets hold of those necrotic cells and creates millions more in the neighbourhood. That applies to toxins like cyclophosphamide too, so most treatments which directly kill cells have the same weakness - lack of contact with the cancer cells. Sequential treatment might be better, but maybe not if you can only use the treatment once. Maybe closely sequential, like a week or three after the first treatment, but not on relapse after a year or two is what I meant, because by then there would be billions of new cells with many more mutations and many more chances of some damn newly mutant cancer cell escaping to go on and proliferate and kill the person. Also, as you say, they'd need to use the right cocktail for the right cellular types present. For example, you can only use so much I131 before you destroy too much marrow or do other damage, so it would be best to use it attached to the most common cancer cell types the particular person has. If the person didn't have a lot of CD20, it would be a shame to pour in too much Bexxar, or Y2B8 which would just do some collateral damage then be dumped out. I see that Rituxan seems quite ineffectual against Intermediate grade [so far anyway] which confirms the doctor's opinion who told us the mechanism of Rituxan being effective against low grade was not simply a matter of identifying the CD20 bearing cells for the immune system to kill. So it was not likely to be effective in CD20 intermediate grade. Is that confirmed as far as you know? There must have been a lot of off-label testing of that by now. Nearly a year since it has been used in quantity. I can't help but think monoclonal antibodies, after a quarter century of attempts, is still not universal enough. Though TNT is universal, so the delivery mechanism is the issue. With good real-time 3D modelling of people and their tumours, I'd have thought they could just inject it straight into tumors as small as a few mm across. I know they aren't very good at that because a daughter had an FNA [fine needle aspiration] of the wrong tissue so they misdiagnosed a cervical neurofibroma for 3 years! They got some lymph node cells instead. But I suppose they were using ultrasound or guesswork. Golfdad97 did mention a universal marker which he is apparently involved in in some way. Telomerase is one. I wonder if there are others - it mustn't be telomerase because that is widely known. He is keen on TCLN nevertheless, so it must be just in the category of "well, it's worth checking out". Thanks for your comments, Maurice