This Week In Science. Found this on facebook and didn't know if it was already posted or not. sorry if it is! also check out this guys facebook page he posts a

This Week In Science

This Week In Science. Found this on facebook and didn't know if it was already posted or not. sorry if it is! also check out this guys facebook page he posts a

Found this on facebook and didn't know if it was already posted or not. sorry if it is! also check out this guys facebook page he posts a lot of cool and interesting photos scientific related.

HIV Vaccine Passes Scientists Baffled by
f 3, r-.'" f Phase I Clinical Mysterious, Tiny
tint Trials Structures in Amazon
Genetic Engineering Vaccine . .' "i,
e To Increase Mouse Begins Phase I '. _'..','
i teets, " NASA Launches scien! itts Confirm q
it (' Advanced Unmanned Existance of ..... :
r, en. ' Probe to Study Largest Single T, Q I
Pi , The Moon Volcano on Earth
Virgin Galactic
lg t
http:// . rne/ Created By ' Flashern . ghibli
  • Recommend tagsx
Views: 30422
Favorited: 59
Submitted: 09/09/2013
Share On Facebook
Add to favorites Subscribe to Schillsifer submit to reddit


What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#2 - betesta (09/09/2013) [-]
We just got one step closer
#37 - commandershit (09/10/2013) [-]
Some day this will be relevant
User avatar #61 to #37 - kingron (09/10/2013) [-]
yeah you could say "whoa there goes my virginity"
User avatar #66 to #61 - senorfrog (09/10/2013) [-]
or "can never touch my virginity now."
#27 - fuckinfuckinfuck ONLINE (09/10/2013) [-]
"Scientists Confirm Existence of Largest Single Volcano on Earth"

So they found at that the largest volcano exists? Was there ever really any doubt? I mean, some volcano somewhere had to be the largest, right?
User avatar #43 to #27 - sketchE (09/10/2013) [-]
likely they had a theory of which was the largest then they actually went out and measured everything and confirmed it
#89 to #27 - anon (09/10/2013) [-]
They confirmed speculations that this particular volcano is the largest.
User avatar #54 to #27 - metalmind (09/10/2013) [-]
No, it's an underwater volcano that is inactive since about 140 million years.
But not much of the sea floor is cartographed yet.
User avatar #46 - gwynn (09/10/2013) [-]
Find a cure for Tinnitus.
User avatar #96 to #46 - eliteqtip (09/10/2013) [-]
#69 - anon (09/10/2013) [-]
you cant vaccinate cancer as it is not a viral infection. I call bs
User avatar #73 to #69 - specialone (09/10/2013) [-]
Certain types of cancer have been associated with viral agents - such as ovarian cancer I believer. The viral agent happens to be very good at producing cancerous cells in the ovaries.
User avatar #78 to #69 - toastycracker (09/10/2013) [-]
Actually, I know some in my family who has stage 4 cancer of the throat that is linked to HPV. Sooooo.
User avatar #40 - maycontainallergys (09/10/2013) [-]
That last one though if we can do that then soon enough anyone with a 3d printer could pirate basic necessity
User avatar #56 to #40 - dedaluminus (09/10/2013) [-]
Too bad you can't pirate a surgeon.
User avatar #67 to #56 - thenewgizmobox (09/10/2013) [-]
well, not at the moment.
User avatar #108 to #56 - deathchain ONLINE (09/10/2013) [-]
But you could pirate the parts to make one.
#11 - nuclearderp (09/10/2013) [-]
Too bad people will likely drop the cancer cure part way, patent their current research, making it cost a fortune to continue, because greed is more important that trying to make the world just that little bit better.
Too bad people will likely drop the cancer cure part way, patent their current research, making it cost a fortune to continue, because greed is more important that trying to make the world just that little bit better.
User avatar #13 to #11 - higaphix (09/10/2013) [-]
So what if it's a private firm that has no federal funding? They can't get their money out of thin air, equipment and resources are expensive
#26 to #13 - puffolotti (09/10/2013) [-]
used dustsucker salesmen get so many money for that...

they cry "i had a ******** of success but the effing CIA don't want me to continue cuz corporations pay them big bucks "

and sheeps give theyr gold.
User avatar #14 to #13 - nuclearderp (09/10/2013) [-]
True, but many people do that, then just drop the research altogether, leaving everyone else to pay them and pick up the research. Which means those actually trying to solve the cure waste money paying to get access to research as opposed to using that money on their own research equipment.
#32 to #11 - anon (09/10/2013) [-]
money is always more important than lives in this ****** up world
#64 to #11 - anon (09/10/2013) [-]
they have to patent these kinds of things otherwise they wont be able to fund the insanely expensive research and development
#112 to #11 - morkotlap (09/10/2013) [-]
Making the world a little bit better costs ********* of money and you need to convince someone to spend them that way.

On one hand you need free trade to incentivize people investing in healthcare, because any research needs funding. On the other you also need to regulate that business, because medicine is too complex and vital for consumers to make rational, informed decisions.

Good example why non-regulated healthcare is terrible idea can be seen in the whole alternative herb homeo sino chakra whatevs, that hurt people and prey on their helplesness.

Good exapmle why over-regulated healthcare is terrible idea can be seen still today in some post-soviet countries where you need to know someone to get the treatment you need and not the treatment you "deserve". Also it still costs ******** of money but the money pays the state and they don't go on the research but on the statesmen hawaii fund.

It's ******* complicated, like everything else in this world.
User avatar #45 to #11 - kanduhuskedetder (09/10/2013) [-]
Good. People need to die. If we find a cure for cancer, AIDS AND can increase the human lifespan any further, overpopulation will grow into a SERIOUS problem. Way worse than it already is.
User avatar #48 to #45 - mothertrollbegood ONLINE (09/10/2013) [-]
Just, out of the blue here. What do you suggest to lower the world's population. I've thought of it myself a lot and all I can really think of that works and would sit well with the people in power is to 'remove' non wealthy/homeless people, though where would 'non wealthy' end and 'wealthy' start.
User avatar #65 to #48 - Rockycrack (09/10/2013) [-]
birth control, just a kid per couple. But the economy would have to change not to be based in population growth
User avatar #51 to #48 - minnten (09/10/2013) [-]
im sure the people up top will think of something. the current system of holding back life saving health care to all but those that can afford it is only a temporary solution. Wars help too though, but they've obviously got that angle covered.
#115 to #45 - morkotlap (09/10/2013) [-]
Overpopulation is not a problem that is caused by too many people. Overpopulation is caused by too many people concentrated in a place that cannot sustain them any longer, be it Detroit or Sudan. There are insane surpluses of food and inhabitable land, able to hold hundred times of the current human population more.

I cringe everytime someone brings up the elitist issue of "too many poeple unworthy of their place on earth".
User avatar #18 to #11 - toosexyforyou (09/10/2013) [-]
Why do people feel like the world owes you something? If you want the world to have a cheap cancer cure, why don't you devote your entire life to becoming knowledgeable enough to make a cure and then hand it out for free.
User avatar #16 to #11 - cleverguy (09/10/2013) [-]
it already costs a fortune to do in the first place. it would be a waste of time and money to drop it halfway if it actually worked
User avatar #105 - subaqueousreach (09/10/2013) [-]
That mysterious structure looks like it's made of web. I bet spiders are evolving into sentience.
User avatar #97 - ronbon (09/10/2013) [-]
does anybody have the links to all of these articles?
User avatar #117 to #113 - ronbon (09/10/2013) [-]
thanks. id give you a thumb but I can't.
User avatar #1 - worshippingbensho (09/09/2013) [-]
''Scientists Confirm Existence of Largest Single Volcano on Earth''...

so... your mom after taco-bell??
#28 to #1 - anon (09/10/2013) [-]
#72 to #1 - adu ONLINE (09/10/2013) [-]
User avatar #74 to #72 - worshippingbensho (09/10/2013) [-]
pretty much...
User avatar #6 to #1 - worshippingbensho (09/09/2013) [-]
well... this just proves that i either need to work on my jokes... or i need to work in what way i present them....
User avatar #42 to #6 - tittylovin (09/10/2013) [-]
Lawerancearm is right.
your mom jokes haven't worked since middle school.
For some reason, making a joke personal and hyperbolic works really well.
My theory is that nobody wants to be insulted, and I gaurantee nobody wants to picture their moms diarrhea asshole.
But the fact that it happened to someone else, someone they don't know, THAT'S funny.

User avatar #52 to #42 - minnten (09/10/2013) [-]
why do people even find the taco bell joke funny anymore? For the first 30 years sure... but god damn it's not like it's anything new.
User avatar #53 to #52 - tittylovin (09/10/2013) [-]
That's what I thought until I tried the new beefy nacho griller with lava sauce.
That was over a week ago and I'm still having intestinal problems.
8/10 would do again, wish the nachos were crispier.
User avatar #25 to #6 - lawerancearm (09/10/2013) [-]
It would have been funnier if you said that it was you after Taco-Bell.

Your mom jokes on FJ are about as funny as Chuck Norris jokes well... anywhere.
#100 to #6 - anon (09/10/2013) [-]
I laughed at your response
nice man
#93 to #6 - anon (09/10/2013) [-]
**** you for getting a lot of green pinkies
User avatar #95 to #93 - worshippingbensho (09/10/2013) [-]
it is that easy to find a sex partner? WTF HAVE I BEEN DOING WITH MY SORRY VIRGIN LIFE IF THIS IS THE DAMN REALITY?!?!?!
User avatar #21 - Crusader (09/10/2013) [-]
You can't vaccinate against cancer.
Cancer is already inside you, the cells are almost impossible to differentiate from normal cells, unless they are tumours.
#35 to #21 - anon (09/10/2013) [-]
But it is not about cancer is it?
User avatar #47 to #21 - mothertrollbegood ONLINE (09/10/2013) [-]
good point, though this does lead to future creations, just like anything that fails. It is used to succeed elsewhere / later on.
User avatar #60 to #21 - OOOnelsonOOO (09/10/2013) [-]
Actually no, Cancer is a deformation of cells that happens during cell reproduction. A vaccine would prevent/lessen the chance of deformations - therefore preventing cancer.
User avatar #118 to #60 - Crusader (09/10/2013) [-]
Yes, so genetically they are almost identical, a vaccine that would target them, would also target normal cells, essentially the same as what Chemo Therapy does.
User avatar #122 to #118 - OOOnelsonOOO (09/11/2013) [-]
There are two current "vaccine ideas"
1) Prevent ALL cells from mutating - That means, yes, target all cells, BUT DON'T kill them.
2)When they become cancerous they create "markers" that differentiate between them and the healthy cells. Stop them from multiplying.

(there is not "attack everything plan", as that would be a cure and not a vaccine.
#22 to #21 - EnergizierAnon (09/10/2013) [-]
and yet, they did it.
User avatar #31 to #23 - Katzie (09/10/2013) [-]
I think a better statement would be "And yet a lot of very smart people believe it to be possible". When I read that, it didn't make sense to me, but after a couple of minutes of googling I belatedly realized it was too complex for an armchair scientist to make judgement on.
User avatar #119 to #31 - Crusader (09/10/2013) [-]
They can think it can be done, but it hasn't been done, since the very vaccine that it talks about in the post, is the one featured in the article I showed, and it doesn't work.
You can't create a vaccine against cells because they are almost identical the real cells, it would essentially be the same as chemo therapy.
If they did manage to create something that could target the small genetic variation between cancerous and non-cancerous cells, then it would be too dangerous to use, because then it's literally just a game of figuring out what to change to have something like the Blacklight Virus from Prototype, where they can use it to target a specific gene mutation, and wipe out that gene from existence.

I know it sounds like a conspiracy theory and i'm a nutcase who plays too many video games, but honestly, if there were some sort of drug/chemical that could kill of something so close to something healthy, it would be on a genetic level, and the government would use it.

Not to mention very few people with power want to cure anything, they want to treat symptoms, not cure people.
User avatar #24 to #23 - EnergizierAnon (09/10/2013) [-]
ah, i see. i shall see myself out then.
#70 to #22 - bigmanblue ONLINE (09/10/2013) [-]
well they clearly didnt because you cant vaccinate against cancer
its simply imposible
vaccines allow the immune system to fight virus' and cancer isnt a virus
cancer is the rapid uncontrolled devision of our own cells its impossible to vacinate against that

whats more there are like 2000 forms of cancer
#103 - xzayviaaeyeres (09/10/2013) [-]
I read that as 'Scientists baffled by mysterious, Tiny structures on Amazon'
I read that as 'Scientists baffled by mysterious, Tiny structures on Amazon'
#4 - anon (09/09/2013) [-]
Did no one see I Am Legend? I dont want to go down that road...
User avatar #17 to #4 - toosexyforyou (09/10/2013) [-]
yeah lets just stop trying to cure any disease because of a movie.
#57 - Bloodgartham (09/10/2013) [-]
All I can think when I see new vacines being made/tested:

It has begun...
#3 - anon (09/09/2013) [-]
>Implying there isn't already a cure for cancer that's constantly being buried by pharmaceutical companies because it's cheaper than chemo
>Implying there aren't already methods to increase human lifespan that only really powerful people in the world have access to
#39 to #3 - anon (09/10/2013) [-]
User avatar #58 to #3 - DJstar (09/10/2013) [-]
i've actually read somewhere there is a cure for cancer. but it's kept under wraps because it's really expensive to create so there's no way to wildly distribute.
#34 to #3 - anon (09/10/2013) [-]
Implying they are talking about cancer..
User avatar #77 to #3 - specialone (09/10/2013) [-]
Implying cancer is a disease in itself and not just a way of describing uncontrolled cell proliferation and migration from the host tissue, which by the way is found all over the body and each case has varying mediators which lead to cancerous cells.
User avatar #19 to #3 - psykobear (09/10/2013) [-]
>implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying >implying
User avatar #59 to #3 - OOOnelsonOOO (09/10/2013) [-]
No matter the cost to make a cure for cancer, it would create a profit. You get 12 years on medicine where you are the ONLY one who can make it. Therefore, if you create it, you an price it ***************** you want, and insurances companies with "unlimited" limit are forced to pay it. Therefore you can cover your cost, and make substantial profit, while going down in history as the man who cured cancer. Few people would pass at that, and if someone does, someone else will find either his notes, or the cure himself.

If there was a cure before now, it would have made it to the public. The "the government can do it, they just want us to die" theory is ******** , and ANY (reputable) economist/businessman/scientist would tell you so.
#29 to #3 - willindor (09/10/2013) [-]
>Implying that scientists will not screw over their employers to go down in history as the person who cured cancer.
>Implying that scientists will not screw over their employers to go down in history as the person who cured cancer.
#33 to #29 - anon (09/10/2013) [-]
>Implying those scientist won't be assassinated.
User avatar #36 to #33 - willindor (09/10/2013) [-]
Before or after coming clean? If you do it right then there is no chance that you'll go horizontal before you show your research to the media.
#5 to #3 - anon (09/09/2013) [-]
Yea, like Steve Jobs!
User avatar #12 to #5 - militarybus (09/10/2013) [-]
#68 - saltycat (09/10/2013) [-]
It is physically impossible to vaccinate against cancer and HIV. A vaccine is where you inject someone with a dead form of a bacteria so that your body can produce antibodies to fight the disease. This means if you ever contract the disease, your body will be able to produce the correct antibodies to rid your body of the disease immediately. However, as HIV is a virus, a dead form cannot be injected as it was never alive in the first place (Much like an enzyme it can only be denatured). Cancer on the other hand is defined as a group of cells that is dividing uncontrollably. This also cannot be vaccinated against as it would effectively be injecting someone with a small tumour. Each of us has the potential to get cancer everyday as cells are constantly being damaged into the position where a tumour could form. What stops this is your body killing those cells before they start to divide into a tumour. Sorry about that, just annoyed me, check your facts next time.
#94 to #68 - adak (09/10/2013) [-]
Dude... Measles, hepatitis A&B, polio, rabies, mumps, influenza and HPV are just a couple of examples of viral diseases that we have functional vaccines for.
User avatar #71 to #68 - specialone (09/10/2013) [-]
Explain influenza vaccines then.

That's a virus and yet we can vaccinate against that.

The "cancer vaccine" probably refers to vaccinating against a certain virus/bacteria which when in the body is able to produce alterations in host cell DNA leading to uncontrolled cell proliferation, ie cancer. This virus/bacteria may be the cause of certain types of cancer. For example, I know that you can get a vaccine against ovarian cancer, but the causing agent is also involved in a lot of cases for throat cancer - hence why it's recommended for everyone.
User avatar #80 to #71 - robertolee (09/10/2013) [-]
There are thousands of mutations of the influenza virus, we obviously can vaccinate against the most common types like you said but not all variations of it.
User avatar #82 to #80 - specialone (09/10/2013) [-]
Yeah, I think they're able to isolate the most common form of the influenza virus for each season and produce enzymes which will act at the binding site of that particular surface protein that has been isolated.
User avatar #88 to #82 - robertolee (09/10/2013) [-]
We are actually injected with a sort of disabled pathogen/antigen produced by the influenza virus and our T-cells/B-cells will recognise the shape of these antigens and code for the antibodies required to kill them so the next time we are infected by this specific virus we won't feel the effects because our immune system already has the code required to mass produce these antigens. We're a lot like giant computers, just very efficient (Although not in all areas)
#75 to #71 - saltycat (09/10/2013) [-]
1. there is no vaccine for influenza, hence why people contract it and can die.
2. the post says: "a vaccine for cancer" not a vaccine for a cancer-causing virus.
User avatar #76 to #75 - specialone (09/10/2013) [-]
1. Yes there is, there are seasonal vaccinations. It's just that the influenza virus mutates at an incredible rate and as such is very hard to lock down/almost impossible a single vaccination for.
2. I assume the OP was making it sound simpler for people not associated with the different forms of cancer.
User avatar #116 - yourbutthurt (09/10/2013) [-]
How the **** do you do 3D print a living kidney?
User avatar #114 - arcticvenom (09/10/2013) [-]
User avatar #111 - jonajon (09/10/2013) [-]
Holy **** , what if they refuse to give the cancer cure to smokers. That would probably make people cut down!
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)