Tuesday, October 8, 2019
Evidence Shows Common Antibiotics Also Kill Cancer Cells
This Is Big - Early Evidence Shows Common Antibiotics Also Kill Cancer Cells
FIONA MACDONALD
10 FEB 2015
https://www.sciencealert.com/this-is-big-common-antibiotics-can-also-kill-off-a-range-of-cancer-cells
Antibiotics aren't just good at treating infections - they may also be able to eradicate cancer stem cells, scientists have found.
Michael Lisanti, an oncologist from Manchester University in the UK, asked his daughter Camilla at the dinner table one night how she would cure cancer, Fiona Macrae reports for the Daily Mail. Her response? That she'd use antibiotics, "like when I have a sore throat".
Along with his wife, cancer researcher Federica Sotgia, Lisanti decided to try out the hypothesis, and discovered that some of the cheapest and most widely-used antibiotics can kill off a range of cancer cells - without harming healthy tissue.
After doing some initial research, the team decided to investigate a class of antibiotics that stop cells from making mitochondria - the organelle that provides energy to the cell - as a side effect.
Cancer stem cells, which trigger tumours and keep them alive as they spread throughout the body, have an unusually high number of mitochondria. So Lisanti and Sotgia thought that not only would these antibiotics be more likely to attack these cells, but they may also be able to stop them from growing.
They tested their hypothesis in the lab by treating cancer stem cells from seven tumour types around the body with common, FDA-approved antibiotics.
Surprisingly, they found that four of the antibiotics were able to kill off cancer stem cells taken from breast, prostate, lung, ovarian, skin, pancreative and brain tumours.
One antibiotic, known as doxycycline, which is often used to treat acne, was particular promising - and it costs only around 10 Australian cents a day, compared to the hundreds of dollars spent on current cancer treatments. Importantly, the antibiotics didn't harm healthy human cells.
Obviously, the results have only been achieved in the lab, and any new cancer treatment takes years of development. But they all start out similar to this, with a proof of concept experiment in vitro - and the team now believes there's enough evidence to test whether antibiotics could have a similar effect in cancer patients.
Publishing their results in the journal Oncotarget, the authors write: "Thus, we now propose to treat cancer like an infectious disease, by repurposing FDA-approved antibiotics for anti-cancer therapy, across multiple tumour types."
Matthew Lam, the senior research officer from Breakthrough Breast Cancer, the charity that helped fund the research, told Macrae that he hopes the research will now move into more extensive testing.
"The conclusions the researchers have drawn, while just hypotheses at this stage, are certainly interesting," he explained. "Antibiotics are cheap and readily available and if in time the link between their use and the eradication of cancer stem cells can be proved, this work may be the first step towards a new avenue for cancer treatment."
Camilla's parents acknowledged her idea by naming her as an author of the study. "I thought it was very naïve to think you could cure cancer with antibiotics," Lisanti told Macrae, "but at the end of the day Camilla was right."
Source: The Daily Mail
Bernie Sanders Has a Plan to Remove Corporate Money From Politics
Jon Queally / Common
Dreams
OCT 07, 2019
https://www.truthdig.com/articles/bernie-sanders-has-a-plan-to-remove-corporate-money-from-politics/
Holding up the small-donor
campaign model his campaign has revolutionized as proof alternatives exist,
Sen. Bernie Sanders on Monday unveiled an ambitious new plan to get “corporate
money out of politics.”
The Sanders plan aims to end
the corrupting influence of dark money by dramatically curbing the ability of
corporations to dominate giving to political parties, replacing the Federal
Election Commission with a new enforcement agency, establishing public funding
for all federal elections, and pushing for a Constitutional Amendment that
makes clear that “money is not speech and corporations are not people.”
The Sanders campaign said in a
statement that the new slate of proposals—which can be read in full here—are
designed to end “the greed-fueled, corrupt corporate influence over elections,
national party convention, and presidential inaugurations” that currently
exists and deliver to the public an election system the puts the America people
at the center.
“Our grassroots-funded
campaign is proving every single day that you don’t need billionaires and
private fundraisers to run for president,” Sanders said. “We’ve received more
contributions from more individual contributors than any campaign in the
history of American politics because we understand the basic reality that you
can’t take on a corrupt system if you take its money.”
The plan would specifically
target corporate giving by banning companies from donating to the Democratic
National Convention and related committees, a change that would dramatically
upend how the DNC has traditionally operated the quadrennial party gathering.
If Sen. Bernie Sanders wins
the Democratic Party's nomination in 2020, he plans to halt all corporate
donations to the party's convention next summer. W/@ryanobles https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/07/politics/bernie-sanders-corporate-money-politics/index.html …
The proposal would also
abolish corporate giving to presidential inaugurations and cap individual
donations to $500.
According to the campaign:
Corporate donors spend
tremendous amounts of money on inaugural events. In 2016, Trump’s inaugural
donors included AT&T,
Bank of America, Boeing, Exxon Mobil, General Motors, Coca Cola, Pepsi, and
many more. Private
Prisons also shelled out hundreds of thousands of dollars for Trump’s
inauguration. And this is nothing new, Corporate donors to the 2013
inauguration included Microsoft,
Boeing, Chevron, Genetech, and numerous federal contractors. Many of these
corporations have federal contracts and business that comes before Congress. It
is absolutely absurd that these entities are allowed to spend enormous sums of
money in an attempt to garner favor with the president and vice president of
the United States.
Sanders outraised all
his Democratic rivals for the presidential nomination in the last quarter by
bringing in $25.3 million, with an average donation of just $18. In September,
the campaign announced it
had received donations from one million different people so far in the
campaign, with teachers, Walmart employees, and other blue collar workers
making up the most represented donors.
In its statement announcing
the new plan Monday, the campaign outlined other key elements of the ‘Corporate Money
Out of Politics Plan,’ which includes:
Enacting mandatory public
financing laws for all federal elections.
Updating and strengthening the
Federal Election Campaign Act to return to a system of mandatory public funding
for National Party Conventions.
Passing a Constitutional
Amendment that makes clear that money is not speech and corporations are not
people.
Ending the influence of
corporations at the DNC.
Banning donations from federal
lobbyists and corporations.
Institute a lifetime lobbying
ban for National Party chairs and co-chairs.
Banning chairs and co-chairs
from working for entities with federal contract, that are seeking government
approval for projects or mergers, or can reasonably be expected to have
business before Congress in the future.
Banning advertising during
presidential primary debates.
Instituting a lifetime
lobbying ban for former members of Congress and senior staffers.
As the Washington Post notes,
Sanders’ plan to replace the FEC—which his campaign describes as
“now-worthless”—with a new agency signals a bold shift:
Sanders envisions [a Federal
Election Agency] made up of three members with legal backgrounds who serve
terms long enough to ensure no president could appoint the entire committee at
any one time. The FEA would have the power to pursue not only civil penalties
but also criminal charges against those violating campaign finance laws.
Many Democratic candidates
have criticized the FEC as toothless in the course of the campaign, though
Sanders is the only one to call for its complete retooling. Sanders’s plan also
attacks corporate influence in politics by banning former members of Congress
and senior staffers from future lobbying endeavors.
The proposal is an indication
that Sanders’ vision to fix American democracy goes far beyond “structural
reforms” by targeting what he perceives as the rot at the center of the system:
corporate greed and massive political power seized by the multinational corporations
and the extremely rich.
A large part of the proposal
includes leveling the playing field by putting working class people at the
center of primaries and elections by boosting public funding. In order to
combat “the outsized influence large corporate donors have on candidates,” the
campaign argues, the U.S. must move to publicly fund federal elections in order
to neutralize the corrupting influence of corporate donors and the uber
wealthy.
Sanders argues that his
grassroots campaign proves that not only that it can be done successfully, but
that the people are hungry for it.
“Working people all over the
country are responding to that message and demanding a political revolution
through their small dollar donations,” Sanders said on Monday. “When we win the
Democratic nomination and defeat Donald Trump, we will transform our political
system by rejecting the influence of big corporate money.”
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)