EPTGirl Invents Nanoparticle that Kills Cancer - Page 7
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
rkarhu
Finland570 Posts
| ||
flamewheel
FREEAGLELAND26782 Posts
I contribute nothing to this world. Also, this. On December 15 2011 21:30 hazelynut wrote: Not to say that this is the case here, but I come from a long line of Asian scientists and it's very common practice to use nepotism, get your kids in good labs with good mentors, and let them work on and get credit for their mentors' projects. It's very rare to see a 17 y.o. with the knowledge to pursue independent research like this. Also also, whoa didn't realize it was you hi Mona. | ||
|
danl9rm
United States3111 Posts
| ||
|
bubblegumbo
Taiwan1296 Posts
If she is well connected enough to have access to all those resources, how is that even considered as a high school level competition? Why is she even in high school still if she actually did all of this? If you've already went to college or are in college you'll smell the bullshit in this easily, especially as a science major. This is the kind of stuff Phd students spent years in grad school and labs doing. I prefer the high school math genius kids that solve insane problems, that's more legit. | ||
|
Eilistraee
Denmark17 Posts
On December 15 2011 22:22 MCMXVI wrote: Our immune system is fully capable of getting rid of HIV on its own. Source? Luc Montagnier, the man who discovered HIV. House of Numbers, a film which will change your view on HIV/AIDS forever. Also, something which i find very suspicious, is that there is no definite way to prove that you are infected with HIV. I want to start this post by apologizing for sidetracking the discussion even more than it already has been, however, these statements are simply not factually accurate and I feel like I should say something about this since they are being presented as facts. For you first statement; if that were the case then there would be no cases of HIV. Ever. It is true that the immunesystem has a chance of suppressing HIV, but there will always be a rate of infections. And once HIV gets a foothold in your body it is pretty much downhill from there, because it destroys your immunesystem from within. The video you reference claims that the high HIV infection rates in the 3rd world are caused by malnutrition and that treatment of the malnutrition might reverse the infection rate and bring to the level it is currently at in 1st world countries. From seeing this interview this may or may not be true. However, this is the authors interpretation of data that is not presented in the interview and subsequent speculation about this data. I very clearly recall him using the wording "it is possible" about his theory. Not exactly the wording I would use for something I was certain of. I would caution against referencing this sort of statements as proof for anything at all. For your second statement; the link you present us with clearly states that HIV antibodies can be detected at the very very latest 6 months after infection. In fact the methods used to detect HIV infection are so sensitive that you may have to test with more than just immunoblotting to be certain that you do not get a false positive. Which means that there indeed is a very definite way of determining whether you are infected with HIV or not. I apologize once again for derailing the thread. | ||
|
mordk
Chile8385 Posts
On December 15 2011 22:22 MCMXVI wrote: Our immune system is fully capable of getting rid of HIV on its own. Source? Luc Montagnier, the man who discovered HIV. House of Numbers, a film which will change your view on HIV/AIDS forever. Also, something which i find very suspicious, is that there is no definite way to prove that you are infected with HIV. But back on topic. As someone else pointed out earlier, she is not very likely to get rich from this. Unless she has closely knit ties with the pharmaceutical elite in the US, of course. Sure, our immune system is capable of fighting HIV, but that only happens on a very small percentage of the population. In most people it doesn't happen. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
I will try and find the link to the video-- I have to ask a professor for it. I think it's pretty pathetic Siemens gave her a prize for a project that was more or less plagarized. Anyone with access to the (rather expensive) materials and equipment could have done it. I'm a bit bitter about Siemens. I lost out in regionals to some project about the effectiveness of dandruff shampoo. It was a pretty trivial topic, and I could have pointed out some big errors in the methodology. I spent a few hundred hours isolating and sequencing a cellulose degrading enzyme gene from a termite to produce ethanol. Admittedly the idea has been done before for a lot of other proteins, but it was a new protein I worked on. | ||
|
dAPhREAk
Nauru12397 Posts
| ||
|
Black[CAT]
Malaysia2589 Posts
 EDIT: Nvm.....thought of making a joke, didnt realise thread was old.... | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On January 24 2012 14:46 dAPhREAk wrote: thought the thread was bumped because she had cured cancer. instead, some dude with a chip on his shoulder decides to shit on her.... not cool dude... I'm just saying that her research is not original at all. I really hate seeing articles where the author makes a discovery or event seem like it's a huge deal or really groundbreaking when it really isn't. Then I pointed out that Siemens has some problems in their selection process based on personal experience. | ||
|
Voltaire
United States1485 Posts
On January 24 2012 14:50 ticklishmusic wrote: I'm just saying that her research is not original at all. I really hate seeing articles where the author makes a discovery or event seem like it's a huge deal or really groundbreaking when it really isn't. Then I pointed out that Siemens has some problems in their selection process based on personal experience. I've learned to never trust a news source for information on scientific breakthroughs. The media tries to make every little thing seem like a new discovery that is going to reshape the 21st century as we know it. But it never happens. They're just simply trying to get as many viewers/hits as possible. | ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
| ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
On January 24 2012 14:53 Voltaire wrote: I've learned to never trust a news source for information on scientific breakthroughs. The media tries to make every little thing seem like a new discovery that is going to reshape the 21st century as we know it. But it never happens. They're just simply trying to get as many viewers/hits as possible. + On January 24 2012 14:55 Bill Murray wrote: oh god it's the zombie apocalypse get to water = proof opposites attract | ||
|
night terrors
China1284 Posts
| ||
|
Sinensis
United States2513 Posts
| ||
|
SerpentFlame
415 Posts
 (-is trying to claim a distant association despite having done nothing nearly as spectacular) | ||
|
Sinensis
United States2513 Posts
On January 24 2012 15:10 SerpentFlame wrote: I tutored her at contest math around 4 years ago! (-is trying to claim a distant association despite having done nothing nearly as spectacular) What does she look like? Is she pretty? | ||
|
Talack
Canada2742 Posts
On December 15 2011 18:04 unit wrote: you still make money, theres just less profit in a cure vs working towards a cure I am sure that she already has a 6 figure a year "starting" job at some laboratory or some pharma company lined up soon Hell she's only 17, a breakthrough of this magnitude would shock me if she didn't get a "set for life" style job offer out of university. | ||
|
Gummy
United States2180 Posts
On December 15 2011 23:03 flamewheel wrote: And I've spent a third of that time period playing DotA. I contribute nothing to this world. Also, this. Also also, whoa didn't realize it was you hi Mona. Omg Hazelynut is gonna go save the world at the end of the semester! On topic: Killing cancer cells is an end for which there already exist many effective means. The hard part of cancer is detection and identification of diseased cells. | ||
|
Deleted User 183001
2939 Posts
On January 24 2012 14:50 ticklishmusic wrote: I'm just saying that her research is not original at all. I really hate seeing articles where the author makes a discovery or event seem like it's a huge deal or really groundbreaking when it really isn't. Then I pointed out that Siemens has some problems in their selection process based on personal experience. Well, if that's the case, then wtf is going on here. Could they really be that dumb? | ||
| ||
