h a l f b a k e r yLike a magnifying lens, only with rocks.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
Ok. i've got it. This site doesnt like my non profit thoughts.
But here i'm posting a more serious one.
With magnetic resonance and very special gradients you can today excite protons in tissue in about 3*3*3 mm squere(?).
That means you are actualy putting energy to a small piece of the tissue.
The
only thing you need to develop is something toxic (poison) that is activating on this energy.
compare with the laser methods.
With this metod you could kill cancer without operation.
(?) Doxorobicin -- something toxic.
http://www.celsion.com/NewCancerDrugs.htm
Targeted to specific tissues by focused heat -- the only difference is that instead of a MRI machine, the technique uses phased array radio frequency transmission. [reensure, Aug 24 2002]
(?) Gamma Ray Knife
http://www.carnegie...2.asp?ComponentID=3
If you're ever in Pittsburgh, go to the Carnegie Science Center. [waugsqueke, Aug 26 2002]
(?) For ¯bristolz:
http://www.vci.org/treatmen.htm
[graphic photos] Steerability I can only guess, accuracy is significant due to the design of the system -- phasing reduces interference. My understanding is that local effects in the 1—cm³ range are routine. [reensure, Aug 26 2002]
[link]
|
| |
MRI is baked - so now please explain what your "something toxic" is that makes this an original and practical idea. |
|
| |
Jonas: can you tell me what it was that FarmerJohn said to you today (in Swedish) and repeat it to me in English ? |
|
| |
It is not "something toxic" that is the original.
It is the aproach to use MRI to fight cancer.
"something toxic" is in my Eyes the same stuff reacting to laser light in other methods |
|
| |
see the wise words on your hot potato idea - yes/no -no is not an option. |
|
| |
This is an idea, and it's moderately (but not very, since you don't need that whopping magnet) practical, except it's Baked. (The physics behind it are the same as the physics behind reensure's link, anyway.) |
|
| |
Gamma ray knife... c'est link. Look Mom, no magnets. |
|
| |
Thing is that radiation is dangerouse.
All kind of X-ray , gamma whatsoever is creating
x-number of cancers while curing Y-numbers.
Static magnetic fields is only affecting your short time memory. (thats an new idea from me) |
|
| |
[reensure]: interesting link. I wonder how steerable, how accurate, the array really is. |
|
| |
It has been nearly five years since this company was more forthcoming with the technical specifications for its device. I've forgotten a lot of the specs. They are now locked in a very competitive market with five or so major players in sight of FDA recommendation; therefore, they are probably attempting to play the safety and effectiveness (specificity) of their product and are less concerned with comparative sensitivities of the products at odds. |
|
| |