EPTQuote: "Smoke in the back of the high school" Really? Wtf, just sounds so absurd to put into an article.
Girl Invents Nanoparticle that Kills Cancer - Page 5
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
RogerX
New Zealand3180 Posts
Quote: "Smoke in the back of the high school" Really? Wtf, just sounds so absurd to put into an article. | ||
|
Holy Check
Romania155 Posts
We're all going to be happy and healthy 140 yr olds. All 10 - 20 billion of us. Hurrah! | ||
|
Legatus Lanius
2135 Posts
| ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
Thanks god, some people in this thread knows how it is and told us. | ||
|
KeksX
Germany3634 Posts
Did she invent it as created it based off of chemicals? Or did she find this particular chemical that has the abilities to do that? Can someone give a brief explanation of what exactly she has done? Yea the author is kinda dumb but thats nothing really new to me, people tend to write things like this all the time when someone young did something, because it encourages yourself to appreciate what the person has done and thus you give more positive feedback in general. It's a little psycho trick that you just have to ignore. Also, 100k$ are a joke. That girl deserves WAY MORE THAN THAT. | ||
|
KoBlades
Austria248 Posts
| ||
|
firehand101
Australia3152 Posts
 ... i get jealous. | ||
|
Grettin
42381 Posts
On December 15 2011 20:24 KeksX wrote: Also, 100k$ are a joke. That girl deserves WAY MORE THAN THAT. If this is as big as the article makes it sound, i have no doubt she will get a decent job offer because of this. She seem to deserve it! | ||
|
Diavlo
Belgium2915 Posts
Nanomedecine has been around for years. As far as 2000 actually. It's a very promising domain which still faces a lot of challenges: safety,efficiency, cost, versatility in terms of drugs... Don't get me wrong, the fact that a 17 years old is able to design a nanoparticule is very impressive and one day, she might become a leading scientist, but at this point, her work is just another paper on a long list of untested miracles. Just like hundreds (thousands) of other works that get far more prestigious prizes that the public never hears about. | ||
|
Tommylew
Wales2717 Posts
| ||
|
insolus
United States23 Posts
On December 15 2011 17:27 Dhalphir wrote: Somewhat unfortunately, she's not likely to get rich from this. Vital cures like this never make the creator any money, because the government won't stand for you charging an amount proportional to what it cost to develop. But, she'll be famous for life if it leads to a true cure. Sadly yeah, but with a brain and dedication like that at such a young age I'm sure she'll be very fine off, not to say I don't think she deserves something great, definitely more than $100,000 | ||
|
3clipse
Canada2555 Posts
| ||
|
XXGeneration
United States625 Posts
Guys, remember this isn't a "Cure" it's a delivery system for drugs. It won't magically cure cancer, but it WILL make treatments easier on the body, allowing targeted treatment instead of simply giving a person drugs and hoping that they can kill the cancer before it kills them... People need to realize this is not a cure for cancer, it is a delivery system for drugs.. I see everyone heralding the girl as a hero for developing a cure, but it's not. It's just a delivery system. Edit: I realize this has been said on the front page already but people need to understand this.. There's a huge difference between "cure" and "effective delivery system". | ||
|
Kazeyonoma
United States2912 Posts
people who are doubting this, realize, that while there ARE researchers around the world who ARE experienced trying at the exact same thing, sometimes it takes a different perspective to find the solution. One such example is an article I think I read here, about how researchers have spent years trying to find a protein strand mapping that could better help the development of cures for diseases such as aids/cancer/etc but the greatest problem is trying to map it properly in 3d space. Years and years of trying and testing yielded improper results, but then they handed it over to a team of gamer minded tech people who solve 3d space things using a game and they solved it in 48 hours. I hope something truly great comes from this and good job to the girl for taking a life experience (her grandfather and great-grandfather's passing) and turning it into motivation to do something amazing. Wish I had that drive. | ||
|
SafeAsCheese
United States4924 Posts
On December 15 2011 20:55 XXGeneration wrote: People need to realize this is not a cure for cancer, it is a delivery system for drugs.. I see everyone heralding the girl as a hero for developing a cure, but it's not. It's just a delivery system. Cancer get cured every week it seems, huh ^^ For anyone interested in this sort of thing, a lot of info is posted really fast here http://www.reddit.com/r/science r/science is heavily moderated as well, so don't worry about the general mob ruining discussions | ||
chenchen
United States1136 Posts
On December 15 2011 19:12 ]343[ wrote: lol, it's a little unclear (though I'd say the average IMO gold medalist is "more impressive" than the average Intel finalist.) But when you have big companies sponsoring you for big $$$ (which, incidentally, doesn't quite exist in math competitions; #1 on USAMO gets $20k, whereas the top 5 in Siemens and Intel each get at least $20k), and who know how to do publicity, ... well, they get the publicity. The fact that the research is in the medical field is just icing on the cake; moreover, so many top projects are biology/chemistry because what can a smart, ambitious high school student who still doesn't know very much do? She can work in a lab for 10 hours a week during the year and 40 a week during the summer, and have a 10% chance at getting good results (depending, of course, on mentor and location). I also don't really agree that the mentors "do everything": they're going to make sure the high schooler does the grunt work in the lab--but the high schooler doesn't exactly get a terrible deal either: they learn lab technique and scientific communication, and get a chance at big money. Not to mention a chance at meeting other smart kids at these competitions, too. The few and far between who do theoretical projects are usually unfortunately limited by their knowledge. It's hard to do representation theory if you barely know what a module is; it's hard to study superconductivity if you don't know any quantum mechanics. So each year, lots of smart kids work their butts off in lab, and some (a) have that extra drive and/or (b) get lucky and win competitions. It's not something so amazing that everyone should immediately know about it, but it's pretty impressive nonetheless. (The same can be said for IMO, except the problem there is that most of advanced Olympiad math is kind of worthless outside of contests. And again, publicity for Siemens/Intel happens because they know what they're doing and have the money to spend.) ... ok I'm not sure what I just ranted about, since it's 5 AM, but hopefully I responded to something someone said. T_T Edit: Hmm, I guess I concede the point that it's easier to talk about "curing cancer" than "solving some geometry problem with techniques that no one ever uses outside math contests" (read: harmonic conjugates... Casey's theorem... sigh.) I just pointed some stuff out because it's really annoying when media reports on these things when the high schooler actually doesn't know . . . . anything. I made the contrast with IMO because IMO contestants seriously know their shit and how to apply it in a setting devoid of outside help. | ||
|
FIStarcraft
United States154 Posts
| ||
|
aksfjh
United States4853 Posts
| ||
|
VTPerfect
United States487 Posts
| ||
|
GoBackToGo
187 Posts
does siemens buy the technology by giving here that price? | ||
| ||
