TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Cancer's invasion equation

39 点作者 lb72超过 7 年前

4 条评论

crusso超过 7 年前
Honest question: Do many people read these entire New Yorker articles? This is what happens to me as I&#x27;m looking at HN:<p>From the main page, I open a bunch of tabs that look interesting. On some types of issues, I also open a tab on the HN discussion.<p>From there, I just wander through the tabs, reading stories and mostly just glancing at some of the top comments. My goal when I browse is to learn something new, and I try to remember that as I&#x27;m reading.<p>When I hit a New Yorker article&#x27;s tab, I&#x27;ve often half-forgotten the subject line from HN... maybe it matches the article&#x27;s title, but I just start reading regardless. Four or five paragraphs in, I start to think, &quot;What the hell does all this setup have to do with the article title I clicked on?&quot; Sure, on some level I know that it probably has something esoteric to do with the main article. These people must be paid by the word.<p>A couple paragraphs further and I start turning the mouse wheel to skim ahead. &quot;Where do they start actually talking about the topic that looked interesting?&quot; At that point, the New Yorker column has maybe mentioned the topic in an ancillary way, but oftentimes it&#x27;s just warming up by bringing in some personality that they&#x27;re going to focus on later in relation to the topic.<p>I get impatient.<p>I start scrolling faster, looking for some actual text to sink my mind into. At this point, I&#x27;m very conscious that I have a bunch of other potentially interesting tabs open in my browser and I&#x27;ve only allocated fifteen minutes or so before I need to get back to work. I scroll way down, hoping that I&#x27;ll hit a paragraph that looks like it&#x27;s full of information. Maybe I&#x27;ll find one that looks interesting, but at that point I also don&#x27;t have a whole lot of context to go on. It&#x27;s like that endlessly long joke that you zone out on and then when they get to the punchline, maybe it sounds kind of funny, but you weren&#x27;t paying attention to all the setup.<p>I close the tab and wonder how anyone has the time and patience to read these things. Maybe I&#x27;m just a slow reader.
评论 #15186724 未加载
评论 #15186366 未加载
评论 #15186268 未加载
评论 #15186834 未加载
评论 #15187236 未加载
评论 #15189440 未加载
nonbel超过 7 年前
&gt;&#x27;“But, over all, would you say the temperature of the water was the key?” I asked. “The water temperature’s a factor. The water chemistry would also have contributed.” “So a combination of the temperature and the salinity?” “But also the calcium content. That’s absolutely important.” I added that to my list of drivers: “Temperature, salinity, calcium . . .”&#x27;<p>Of course... what is more important to determining the volume of a box? Is the height a key variable? Sure, but you also need to know the width. Not only that but also the height.<p>Surely irrelevant things like the color of the box, or material it is made of, will also have non-zero correlations with the volume. This is one reason why the NHST strategy of finding isolated &quot;effects&quot; will never lead to an &quot;equation for cancer&quot;, but is very good at generating large numbers of red herrings.<p>You need a model of the process of carcinogenesis, and then to collect data allowing you to estimate (at least get some decent upper&#x2F;lower bounds on) the parameters of the model (mutation rates, division rates, number of cells of each type, % aberrant cells that get cleared by the immune system, % that commit apoptosis, etc).<p>Armitage and Doll started this way back in the 1950s and had quite an effect on the current cancer paradigm (slow accumulation of genetic errors in a single cell lineage -&gt; cancer), but since then it has been only a tiny minority of cancer researchers working on the actual problem.
trhway超过 7 年前
&gt;Malignancy wasn’t simply about cells spreading; it was also about staying—and flourishing—once they had done so.<p>&gt;In the field of oncology, “holistic” has become a patchouli-scented catchall for untested folk remedies: raspberry-leaf tea and juice cleanses.<p>why some &quot;juices&quot;, or more specifically just plain baking soda in a glass of drinking water, may actually help - at least for mice it doubled survival chances here <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov&#x2F;pmc&#x2F;articles&#x2F;PMC2834485&#x2F;figure&#x2F;F1&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov&#x2F;pmc&#x2F;articles&#x2F;PMC2834485&#x2F;figure&#x2F;...</a><p>(it is pretty logical - metastatic invasion is based on acidic dissolution of ECM (which is collagen mostly) and cancer tumor local environment is acidic as a result of increased glycolysis and the resulting increased lactate production, so increasing the pH of the tumor environment naturally impedes metastatic invasion)
epmaybe超过 7 年前
This article reminds me of all the things people talk about when they try and approach cell signaling from a systems approach. Modeling biological systems as an actual system probably does make sense in the long run. The problem is that it&#x27;s far, far harder to study and generate that model.
评论 #15186831 未加载