Public Employee Unions Must Be Crushed !

[clocker]

Given that bad (for the taxpayer) contracts, negotiated badly, by bad, stupid, people, people elected by idiots, must be executed in order to avoid unfairness to the beneficiaries of the contracts, and given as well that many of these contracts were basically negotiated to eternally grow in value to the unions and cost to the public, and to do so in perpetuity, how is electing new officials seen as a solution?

We see large corporations, municipalities and even states entertaining bankruptcy, yet the watchword is fairness to the unions?


Unless someone can tell me precisely how I am to blame for, say, GM's situation, I'd like a rationale for this "fairness", and also one explaining why, just because I don't have a "contract" with someone/thing, I am not entitled to that selfsame "fairness"?
And yet these same "bad, stupid people" elected "by idiots" are better qualified than the Feds to decide what sort of education a states children will receive...and that's perfectly OK with you.
Is it fair to point out that the children who grow up thinking that Jesus rode dinosaurs had no say in the contract either?

[j2k4]

I have a very quick question:

Given that bad (for the taxpayer) contracts, negotiated badly, by bad, stupid, people, people elected by idiots, must be executed in order to avoid unfairness to the beneficiaries of the contracts, and given as well that many of these contracts were basically negotiated to eternally grow in value to the unions and cost to the public, and to do so in perpetuity, how is electing new officials seen as a solution?

We see large corporations, municipalities and even states entertaining bankruptcy, yet the watchword is fairness to the unions?

Okay...how far do we take that?

The taxpayers of whatever municipality, for example, are contractually bound to hold up their end...unto bankruptcy.

Yet, in lieu of bankruptcy, the unions are able to access, through government, the pockets of every taxpayer, not just ones who cast the stupid "vote".

So-

Unless someone can tell me precisely how I am to blame for, say, GM's situation, I'd like a rationale for this "fairness", and also one explaining why, just because I don't have a "contract" with someone/thing, I am not entitled to that selfsame "fairness"?

I believe you meant to quote me. I also believe you could use more sentence breaks, it's OK if the question is longer :smilie4:.

I speak on behalf of the rational man, presenting rational solutions. However, I still get to hide behind the cynical view of it all being fucked.

Because let's face it, it's pretty fucked. :yes:

Yes, and it's better to get that out front before precious cyber-ink is spilled in vain.

I like run-on sentences - they are useful for sorting the intellectual fly-specks from the pepper.

Good night. :)

[mjmacky]

Yes, and it's better to get that out front before precious cyber-ink is spilled in vain.

I like run-on sentences - they are useful for sorting the intellectual fly-specks from the pepper.

Good night. :)

There's barely anyone reading these threads, ahchoo!

[999969999]

The immune response...

Cancer is hazardous because the cell continues to undergo mitotic division without responding to negative feedback or programmed cell death. It continues growing, stealing blood supply and nutrients from neighboring cells just to feed its growing mass of cells. The immune system usually won't attack it since they're still mostly normal cells with a mutated flaw in the genetic code (most mutations are either fixed or cause cell death). It will continue to do so until it is either removed, reduced or it kills its host. So in essence, cancer is like unabated capitalism.


Isn't it quite telling how you completely ignored the rest of my quote:





I hope this doesn't burst your bubble or anything, but you have quite inaccurately described cancer. Type the following to have me elaborate, "up up down down left right left right B A select start"



The immune response

Any substance that raises an alarm in the body, causing the immune system to react to and attack it is called an antigen. This immune response can lead to destruction of both the antigens and anything they are attached to, such as germs or cancer cells.

Germs such as viruses, bacteria, and parasites have substances on their outer surfaces, such as certain proteins, that are not normally found in the human body. The immune system sees these foreign substances as antigens. Cancer cells are also different from normal cells in the body. They often have some unusual substances on their outer surfaces that can act as antigens.

But the immune system is much better at recognizing and attacking germs than it is cancer cells. Germs are very different from normal human cells and are seen as truly foreign. But cancer cells and normal cells can be very much alike, and any differences are less clear cut. Because of this the immune system may not always recognize cancer cells as foreign. Cancer cells are less like soldiers of an invading army and more like traitors within the ranks of the human cell population. This may be why cancers are often able to grow despite the presence of a healthy, working immune system.

http://www.cancer.org/Treatment/TreatmentsandSideEffects/TreatmentTypes/Immunotherapy/immunotherapy


I emphasize the word "traitor" here.

He wants to destroy the United States, but he is a U.S. citizen living in the U.S.


I'll make it easier for you, so you won't have to read so much of the quote from the American Cancer Society:

Cancer cells are less like soldiers of an invading army and more like traitors within the ranks of the human cell population

[mjmacky]

Isn't it quite telling how you completely ignored the rest of my quote:

It is telling, it says, "mjmacky knows a lot more about cancer than 9s".

[mjmacky]

... and in turn, can formulate better metaphors based on said subject.

[j2k4]

... and in turn, can formulate better metaphors based on said subject.

An advantage of increasing age.

I suffer from it as well.

[mjmacky]

... and in turn, can formulate better metaphors based on said subject.

An advantage of increasing age.

I suffer from it as well.

Professional experience can't hurt either :smilie4:

[999969999]

I guess I didn't quite make it simple enough for Comrade Macky.

"Cancer cells are less like soldiers of an invading army and more like traitors within the ranks of the human cell population." (this quote came from the American Cancer Society, so, if you are claiming you know more about cancer than they do, you are full of it).

I'm calling you a traitor because just like cancer cells you are turning on our country. You have said over and over again that you want to destroy the U.S. And unfortunately, no one but me seems to care about what you have said, which backs up what I am trying to say about this. If there are enough people like you, their country will be destroyed, but they don't bat an eye. They don't care. They don't recognize people like you as a serious threat to their own country.

Much like the immune system ignoring cancer as it kills the body.

I hope that was simple enough for you to understand.

[mjmacky]

I guess I didn't quite make it simple enough for Comrade Macky.

"Cancer cells are less like soldiers of an invading army and more like traitors within the ranks of the human cell population." (this quote came from the American Cancer Society, so, if you are claiming you know more about cancer than they do, you are full of it).

I'm calling you a traitor because just like cancer cells you are turning on our country. You have said over and over again that you want to destroy the U.S. And unfortunately, no one but me seems to care about what you have said, which backs up what I am trying to say about this. If there are enough people like you, their country will be destroyed, but they don't bat an eye. They don't care. They don't recognize people like you as a serious threat to their own country.

Much like the immune system ignoring cancer as it kills the body.

I hope that was simple enough for you to understand.

You seem to be neglecting that the American Cancer Society has oversimplified their explanation of cancer in that statement in order to describe it to the rest of the population. Next, you'll be telling me about how the internet is a series of tubes. Tell me about the internet.

The immune system attacks based on receptor recognition. Foreign cells can be killed in the body because they tend not to produce the peptide sequences that embed in the cell membrane for NK cells to recognize as inhibitory, so the cell is attacked and killed. If it is a cell that is attacked by an external influence, those inhibitory peptides tend to be modified and the inhibitory receptor doesn't recognize the cell, killing the cell. Cell stress due to infection or or cancer produces a peptide sequence that embeds in the membrane and signals an immune response to kill it, but with cancer the inhibitory peptide sequence is usually intact and cancels the immune response to kill the cell.

[999969999]

I guess I didn't quite make it simple enough for Comrade Macky.

"Cancer cells are less like soldiers of an invading army and more like traitors within the ranks of the human cell population." (this quote came from the American Cancer Society, so, if you are claiming you know more about cancer than they do, you are full of it).

I'm calling you a traitor because just like cancer cells you are turning on our country. You have said over and over again that you want to destroy the U.S. And unfortunately, no one but me seems to care about what you have said, which backs up what I am trying to say about this. If there are enough people like you, their country will be destroyed, but they don't bat an eye. They don't care. They don't recognize people like you as a serious threat to their own country.

Much like the immune system ignoring cancer as it kills the body.

I hope that was simple enough for you to understand.

You seem to be neglecting that the American Cancer Society has oversimplified their explanation of cancer in that statement in order to describe it to the rest of the population. Next, you'll be telling me about how the internet is a series of tubes. Tell me about the internet.

The immune system attacks based on receptor recognition. Foreign cells can be killed in the body because they tend not to produce the peptide sequences that embed in the cell membrane for NK cells to recognize as inhibitory, so the cell is attacked and killed. If it is a cell that is attacked by an external influence, those inhibitory peptides tend to be modified and the inhibitory receptor doesn't recognize the cell, killing the cell. Cell stress due to infection or or cancer produces a peptide sequence that embeds in the membrane and signals an immune response to kill it, but with cancer the inhibitory peptide sequence is usually intact and cancels the immune response to kill the cell.

And in the end... the immune system does not attack and kill the cancer cell (the TRAITOR), allowing it to grow out of control eventually killing the body.

None of the liberals on this forum see you as a threat to their very way of life and existence, but it is people like you who if left unchecked will eventually destroy this country. You are a traitor and you want to destroy the United States, but no one bats an eye about it.

It is really quite amazing.


Here is the full quote, since you think you know more than the American Cancer Society:

What is immunotherapy?
Immunotherapy

Immunotherapy is treatment that uses your immune system to fight cancer. The 2 main ways that this is done is to boost the patient's own immune system or to give man-made versions of the normal parts of the immune system. Many future advances against cancer will probably come from this field.

Here we will explain:

The different cells of the immune system and how they normally work to protect you from disease
The different types of immunotherapy (monoclonal antibodies, cancer vaccines, non-specific immunotherapies and adjuvants [immune stimulants])
The forms of immunotherapy used for certain types of cancer

What is immunotherapy?

Immunotherapy is a form of biologic therapy or biotherapy. It is treatment that uses certain parts of the immune system to fight diseases, including cancer. This can be done in a couple of ways:

Stimulating your own immune system to work harder or smarter
Giving you immune system components, such as man-made immune system proteins

Immunotherapy is sometimes used by itself to treat cancer, but it is most often used along with or after another type of treatment to boost its effects.

For a long time doctors suspected that the immune system had an effect on certain cancers. Even before the immune system was well understood, William Coley, MD, a New York surgeon, first noted that getting an infection after surgery seemed to help some cancer patients. In the late 1800s, he began treating cancer patients by infecting them with certain kinds of bacteria, which came to be known as Coley toxins. Although he had some success, his technique was overshadowed when other forms of cancer treatment, such as radiation therapy, came into use.

Doctors have learned a great deal about the immune system since then. This has led to research into how it can be used to combat cancer and exploring many different approaches. In the last few decades immunotherapy has proven useful in treating several types of cancer.

The idea of using one's own immune system to fight cancer is tempting, but immunotherapy still has a fairly small role in treating most cancers. So far, in most cases, it hasn't been shown to clearly be better than other forms of treatment. For instance, it seems to work best when treating smaller, early stage cancers, and it may be less helpful for more advanced disease. Its main role at this time is making other forms of treatment better, or giving cancer patients a treatment option that may be less toxic than the usual treatments.

But researchers have made important progress in this field in recent years. Newer treatments are now being tested that seem to work better, and will have a greater impact on the outlook for people with cancer in the future.
What the immune system does

Your immune system is a collection of organs, special cells, and substances that help protect you from some infections and diseases. Immune system cells and the substances they make circulate through your body to protect it from germs that cause infections. They also help protect you in some ways from cancer.

It may help to think of your body as a castle. Think of viruses, bacteria, and parasites as hostile, foreign armies that are not normally found in your body. They try to invade your body to use its resources to serve their own purposes, and they can hurt you in the process. In fact, doctors often use the word foreign to describe invading germs or other substances not normally present in the body.

The immune system is your body's defense force. It helps keep invading germs out, or helps kill them if they do get into your body.
The immune response

Any substance that raises an alarm in the body, causing the immune system to react to and attack it is called an antigen. This immune response can lead to destruction of both the antigens and anything they are attached to, such as germs or cancer cells.

Germs such as viruses, bacteria, and parasites have substances on their outer surfaces, such as certain proteins, that are not normally found in the human body. The immune system sees these foreign substances as antigens. Cancer cells are also different from normal cells in the body. They often have some unusual substances on their outer surfaces that can act as antigens.

But the immune system is much better at recognizing and attacking germs than it is cancer cells. Germs are very different from normal human cells and are seen as truly foreign. But cancer cells and normal cells can be very much alike, and any differences are less clear cut. Because of this the immune system may not always recognize cancer cells as foreign. Cancer cells are less like soldiers of an invading army and more like traitors within the ranks of the human cell population. This may be why cancers are often able to grow despite the presence of a healthy, working immune system.

Key players in your immune system

The way your immune system responds to antigens is a highly coordinated process that uses many types of cells.

Most cells of the immune system are lymphocytes, a type of white blood cell. Several types of lymphocytes work together to attack cancer cells:

B cells (B lymphocytes)
T cells (T lymphocytes): killer T cells, helper T cells, regulatory (suppressor) T cells
Natural killer (NK) cells

Antigen-presenting cells (APCs) are not lymphocytes but work closely with them to fight cancer. They work by taking part of the foreign cell and carrying it to where other immune cells can "see" it. This helps stimulate the immune reaction. The 2 main groups of antigen-presenting cells are:

Monocytes and macrophages
Dendritic cells

Other types of white blood cells, known as neutrophils or granulocytes, also make up an important part of the immune system. Their role is to fight and kill bacteria. They will not be discussed further in this document.
Lymphocytes
B cells and plasma cells

B cells (B lymphocytes) are made in the bone marrow, which is the spongy inner part of some bones. After they are made, most B cells move to the lymph nodes, which are bean-sized collections of immune system cells found throughout the body. B cells also collect in the lymph tissue contained in some internal organs such as the spleen, stomach, and intestines.

B cells can't directly destroy germs or cancer cells by themselves. But they play an important role in immune defenses by making antibodies, which are large, sticky proteins. Each antibody is made to attach to a certain antigen.

When a B cell comes into contact with an antigen (on a germ or cancer cell), it starts making antibodies and turns into a plasma cell. Plasma cells release antibodies that recognize and bind (attach) only to that antigen. The antibodies then help kill any cells that have the antigen. The antibodies may destroy them directly or they may serve as a marker for other immune system cells, such as T cells, to destroy them.
T cells

Some lymphocytes that are formed in the bone marrow enter the bloodstream before they are fully mature. They go to the thymus (a small gland in front of the heart and behind the breastbone), where they mature and gain new disease-fighting properties.

Once they leave the thymus gland, they are known as T lymphocytes or T cells (named for the T in thymus). T cells gather in the lymph nodes and spleen, where they work together with other immune system cells. T cells have special proteins on their surfaces that allow T cells to recognize and react to parasites, cancer cells, and cells infected by viruses, much like antibodies do.

There are 3 main kinds of T cells. They each have different jobs.

Killer T cells (cytotoxic T lymphocytes) destroy unwanted cells in the body. When these cells come in contact with the specific foreign cells they recognize, they give off substances that kill the cells.
Helper T cells do not directly kill cancer cells or germs, but they release substances that help B cells and killer T cells work better.
Regulatory (suppressor) T cells act as brakes to help keep the immune system in check. They help ensure that the immune system does not overreact and attack other healthy parts of the body.

Natural killer (NK) cells

Lymphocytes called natural killer (NK) cells are not as picky as killer T cells in what they attack. When fighting cancer, they are drawn to areas with cancer cells by substances given off by other cells. They attach to cancer cells and release substances that split the cells open, killing them. They then look for other cancer cells to attack.
Antigen-presenting cells

The main function of antigen-presenting cells (APCs) is to help lymphocytes recognize antigens on foreign cells (including cancer cells). Antigen-presenting cells include monocytes, macrophages, and dendritic cells.

Monocytes and macrophages

Monocytes are made by the bone marrow and released into the bloodstream. Some monocytes enter tissues and organs. Here they become macrophages, capable of surrounding and "eating" unwanted cells. They then present antigens from the devoured cells on their outer surface, so that lymphocytes can recognize the foreign antigens if they are found in the body later on. Both monocytes and macrophages can act as APCs to help start an immune response.

Dendritic cells

Like monocytes and macrophages, dendritic cells work by finding unwanted cells in the body, chewing them up, and presenting their antigens on their surfaces. They then travel to an area with many lymphocytes, such as the lymph nodes or spleen. Here, they activate certain lymphocytes to go out and attack any similar cells in the body. Dendritic cells are not common, but they are the most powerful type of antigen-presenting cell. Because of this, they are the focus of many cancer vaccines currently being developed.
Types of immunotherapy

There are good reasons to think the immune system helps in the fight against cancer. For instance, people with weakened immune systems are more likely to get certain cancers. But many people with normal immune systems still develop cancer. This may be because the immune system doesn't see the cancer cells as foreign. Often, this is because the cancer cells (and their antigens) are not different enough from those of normal cells. Sometimes the immune system recognizes the cancer cells, but the response may not be strong enough to destroy the cancer. Cancer cells themselves may also give off substances that keep the immune system in check.

To overcome this, researchers have designed ways to help the immune system recognize cancer cells and strengthen its response so that it will destroy the cancer.

There are 2 main types of immunotherapy. Active immunotherapies stimulate your body's own immune system to fight the disease. Passive immunotherapies do not rely on your body to start the attack on the disease; instead, they use immune system components (such as antibodies) made in the lab. We will be talking about both types here.

Another way that immunotherapies can be understood is based on whether or not they target a certain type of cell. Most of the immunotherapies being used today target one kind of cell or antigen (specific immunotherapies), but there are some that stimulate the immune system in general. These are called non-specific immunotherapies. Sometimes non-specific immunotherapies are used with other treatments to help increase the attack on the cancer. These kinds of treatments are generally only used along with other treatments, so they are called adjuvants.

There are other treatments that target one type of cell and don't tend to damage other cells, which are also called targeted therapies. For more information see our document, Targeted Therapies.

The types of immunotherapy described in the following sections include:

Monoclonal antibodies (passive immunotherapies)
Other targeted therapies that carry toxins to cancer cells (passive immunotherapies)
Cancer vaccines and other active immunotherapies
Non-specific immunotherapies and adjuvants

The last section covers some types of cancer in which immunotherapies are used, and which kinds are used to treat them.
Monoclonal antibodies

Monoclonal antibodies are the most widely used form of cancer immunotherapy at this time.

Monoclonal antibody therapy uses antibodies that are made in the lab rather than by a person's own immune system. This type of treatment is considered a form of passive immunotherapy. These treatments do not require the person's immune system to start the fight against the cancer. Once the antibodies are given, they can then recruit other parts of the immune system to destroy the cancer cells.

The first monoclonal antibodies were made in the lab by fusing a myeloma (a type of bone marrow cancer) cell from a mouse with a mouse B cell that makes a certain antibody. The cell that results from this fusion is called a hybridoma.

Combining a B cell that can recognize one special antigen and a long-lived myeloma cell makes the resulting hybridoma cell a long-lasting, antibody-making factory. Because the antibodies made are all identical clones made from a single (mono) hybridoma cell, they are called monoclonal antibodies (sometimes abbreviated as MoAbs or MAbs).

The first MAbs were made entirely from mouse cells. One problem with this is that the human immune system will see these antibodies as foreign (because they're from a different species) and then will mount a response against them. In the short term, this can sometimes cause allergic-type reactions. In the long term, it means that the antibodies may only work the first time they are given; after that, the body's immune system is primed to destroy them before they can be helpful.

Over time, researchers have learned how to replace some parts of these mouse antibody proteins with human parts. Depending on how much of the MAb is human, these are called chimeric or humanized antibodies. Some MAbs are now fully human, which means they are likely to be even safer and may be more effective than older MAbs.

An even newer approach uses fragments of antibodies instead of whole ones. Smaller pieces may be better able to reach a tumor, which may make them more effective.

Over the past 10 years or so, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved several MAbs to treat certain cancers, as seen in the table below.

Clinical trials of monoclonal antibody therapy are also being done on almost every type of cancer. As researchers have found more antigens that are linked to cancer, they have been able to make monoclonal antibodies against more and more cancers.

Two types of monoclonal antibodies are used in cancer treatments:

Naked monoclonal antibodies are those without any drug or radioactive material attached to them.
Conjugated monoclonal antibodies are those joined to a chemotherapy drug, radioactive particle, or a toxin (a substance that poisons cells).

Naked monoclonal antibodies

Naked MAbs are the most commonly used MAbs at this time. Although they all work by attaching themselves to specific antigens, they can be helpful in different ways.

Markers for destruction

Some naked MAbs attach to cancer cells to act as a marker for the body's immune system to destroy them. Antibodies now in use in this group include:

Rituximab (Rituxan): Rituximab is used to treat B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma and some other diseases. It is a monoclonal antibody against the CD20 antigen, found on B cells. It works, in part, by labeling cells so that the immune system can attack them.

Ofatumumab (Arzerra): Ofatumumab is another antibody against the CD20 antigen. It is used mainly to treat chronic lymphocytic leukemia when other treatments are no longer effective.

Alemtuzumab (Campath): Alemtuzumab is an antibody against the CD52 antigen, which is found on both B cells and T cells. It is used to treat some patients with B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

Activation blockers

Some naked MAbs don't really interact with a person's own immune system. Their effects come from their ability to attach to the specific antigens that are working parts of cancer cells or other cells that help cancer cells grow, and stop them from working. These MAbs are also referred to as targeted therapies. Examples of FDA-approved MAbs of this type include:

Trastuzumab (Herceptin): Trastuzumab is an antibody against the HER2/neu protein. A large amount of this protein is present on tumor cells in some cancers. When HER2/neu is activated, it helps these cells grow. Trastuzumab stops these proteins from becoming active. It is used to treat breast cancers that have large amounts of this protein.

Cetuximab (Erbitux): Cetuximab is an antibody against the EGFR protein, which is present in large amounts on some tumor cells and helps them grow and divide. Cetuximab blocks the activation of EGFR. It is used to treat some advanced colorectal cancers as well as some head and neck cancers.

Panitumumab (Vectibix): This MAb also targets the EGFR antigen. It is used to treat some cases of advanced colorectal cancer.

Bevacizumab (Avastin): Bevacizumab targets the VEGF protein, which is normally made by tumor cells to attract new blood vessels to feed their growth. Bevacizumab attaches to VEGF, which blocks it from signaling for new blood vessels to form. This MAb is used along with chemotherapy to treat some colorectal, lung, breast, and kidney cancers, as well as glioblastomas (a type of brain tumor). It is being studied for use against other cancers.

Some of these antibodies have been used for many years. At first they were used mostly after other treatments had stopped working. But more studies have been done and continue to be done. Now, these antibodies are being used earlier in the course of cancer treatment.
Side effects

Monoclonal antibodies are given intravenously (injected into a vein). Compared with side effects of chemotherapy, the side effects of naked MAbs are usually fairly mild and are often more like an allergic reaction. If they do occur, it is most often while the drug is first being given.

Possible side effects can include:

Fever
Chills
Weakness
Headache
Nausea
Vomiting
Diarrhea
Low blood pressure
Rashes

Some MAbs also have effects that are specific to the antigens they target. For instance, like most chemotherapy drugs, some can affect the bone marrow. This can cause lower levels of blood cells, which can increase the risk of bleeding and infection in some people.
Conjugated monoclonal antibodies

Conjugated MAbs are monoclonal antibodies that are attached to drugs, toxins, or radioactive substances. The MAbs are used as homing devices to take these substances directly to the cancer cells. The MAb circulates in the body until it can find and hook onto the target antigen. It then delivers the toxic substance where it is needed most. This lessens the damage to normal cells in other parts of the body.

Conjugated antibodies may pack more of a punch than naked MAbs, but for this reason they often cause more side effects, too. The side effects depend on which type of substance they're attached to.

Conjugated MAbs are also sometimes referred to as tagged, labeled, or loaded antibodies. They can be divided into groups depending on what they are linked to.

MAbs with radioactive particles attached are referred to as radiolabeled, and therapy with this type of antibody is known as radioimmunotherapy (RIT).
MAbs with chemotherapy drugs attached are often referred to as chemolabeled.
MAbs attached to toxins are called immunotoxins.

Radiolabeled antibodies

Two radiolabeled antibodies have been approved to treat cancer.

Ibritumomab tiuxetan (Zevalin) delivers radioactivity directly to cancerous B lymphocytes. It is used to treat B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma that has not responded to standard treatment.
Tositumomab (Bexxar) is used to treat certain types of non-Hodgkin lymphoma that no longer respond to rituximab (Rituxan) or chemotherapy.

Aside from being used to treat cancer, radiolabeled antibodies can also be used along with special cameras to help find areas of cancer metastasis (spread) in the body. While some radiolabeled antibodies such as ProstaScint (for prostate cancer) have been approved by the FDA, their role in helping to detect cancer has been very limited so far.

Chemolabeled antibodies

These are being studied and are available in the United States only through clinical trials at this time. None have been approved by the FDA as of mid-2009.

Immunotoxins

Immunotoxins are made by attaching MAbs to bacterial toxins such as diphtheria toxin (DT) or pseudomonal exotoxin (PE40), or to plant toxins such as ricin A or saporin.

Immunotoxins have shown some early promise in shrinking a few cancers, particularly lymphomas. But some major problems still need to be solved before this new form of cancer treatment can be used more widely.

The only immunotoxin approved for treating cancer is gemtuzumab ozogamicin (Mylotarg). It has a toxin called calicheamicin, attached to an antibody against the CD33 antigen, which is present on most leukemia cells. Gemtuzumab is used to treat some people with acute myelogenous leukemia.

Another immunotoxin, BL22, showed promising results in early studies against some forms of chronic leukemia, even in patients who no longer responded to chemotherapy. In early clinical trials, about 2 out of 3 patients had complete responses to the treatment (no evidence of cancer) that lasted up to 2 years. A newer, improved version of this immunotoxin, known as HA22 (CAT-8015), is now being studied.

Clinical trials of other immunotoxins are also being done in people with certain leukemias, lymphomas, brain tumors, and other cancers.
Other targeted therapies containing toxins

Scientists are also studying toxins linked to hormone-like substances called growth factors. Many cancer cells have large numbers of receptors for growth factors on their surfaces. This makes growth factors more likely to attach to these cells than those cells with fewer receptors. When these growth factor receptors are stimulated, the cancer cells reproduce and grow faster.

Researchers have learned how to attach growth factors to toxins. When the growth factor-toxin combination reaches the cancer cell's growth factor receptors, it delivers its payload of toxin to kill the cell. The concept behind these growth factor/toxin drugs is very like that of immunotoxins. But because the toxin-carrying growth factor drugs do not contain antibodies, they are not classified as immunotoxins.

The only growth factor/toxin currently approved by the FDA is denileukin diftitox (Ontak). It is a growth factor known as interleukin-2 (IL-2) attached to a toxin from the germ that causes diphtheria. Denileukin diftitox is used to treat a rare type of skin lymphoma known as mycosis fungoides (or cutaneous T-cell lymphoma). It is also being studied to be used against a number of other cancers.
Cancer vaccines

Cancer vaccines have been studied for several decades, but advances in this field have been slower than for other forms of immunotherapy. They are still mostly experimental treatments at this time.

Most of us know about vaccines given to healthy people for infectious diseases, such as measles and mumps. These vaccines use weakened or killed viruses, bacteria, or other germs to start an immune response in the body. Getting the immune system ready to defend against these germs helps it keep the germs from making people sick.

Some so-called "cancer vaccines" are designed to work the same way. For example, new vaccines against the human papilloma virus (HPV) help prevent women from getting cervical, vaginal, and vulvar cancer. Vaccines against hepatitis B virus (HBV) may lower some people's risk of getting liver cancer. But these vaccines don't target cancer cells; they target the viruses that can cause these cancers.

True cancer vaccines are different from the vaccines that work against viruses. Instead of preventing disease, they are meant to get the immune system to attack a disease that already exists.

A true cancer vaccine contains cancer cells, parts of cells, or pure antigens. The vaccine increases the immune response against cancer cells that are already present in the body. It may be combined with other substances or cells called adjuvants that help boost the immune response even further.

Cancer vaccines are thought of as active immunotherapies because they are meant to trigger your own immune system to respond. They are specific because they should only affect the cancer cells. These vaccines don't just boost the immune system in general; they cause the immune system to attack cells with one or more specific antigens. And because the immune system has special cells for memory, it's hoped that the drugs will help keep cancer from coming back.

A prostate cancer vaccine, sipuleucel-T (Provenge®), has recently been approved by the FDA to treat advanced prostate cancer. For this vaccine, white blood cells (cells of the immune system) are removed from the patient's blood and exposed to a protein from prostate cancer cells called prostatic acid phosphatase (PAP). These cells are then given back to the patient by infusion into a vein (IV). This process is repeated 2 more times, 2 weeks apart, so that the patient gets 3 doses of cells. In the body, the cells induce other immune system cells to attack the patient's prostate cancer. Common side effects included fever, chills, fatigue, back and joint pain, nausea, and headache. These most often started during the cell infusions and lasted no more than a day or 2. A few men had more severe symptoms, including problems breathing and high blood pressure, which improved with treatment. When used in men with metastatic prostate cancer that no longer responded to hormone therapy, the vaccine helped them live more than 4 months longer on average (than the men who didn't get the vaccine). Studies to see if this vaccine can help men with less advanced prostate cancer are continuing.

Other cancer vaccines have shown some promise in clinical trials, but have yet been approved in the United States to treat cancer. Several types of cancer vaccines are now being studied, with a few reaching late stage clinical trials.
Tumor cell vaccines

Tumor cell vaccines are made up of actual cancer cells that have been removed during surgery. The cells are treated in the lab, usually with radiation, so they cannot form more tumors. In most cases, doctors also change the cells in certain ways, often by adding chemicals or new genes, to make them more likely to be seen as foreign by the immune system. The cells are then injected into the patient. The immune system recognizes antigens on these cells, then seeks out and attacks any other cells with these antigens that are still in the body.

In some cases, doctors give the vaccine along with substances called adjuvants that increase the immune response. The general boost that adjuvants give to the immune system is meant to make the vaccine work better.

Some promising newer versions of these vaccines use tumor cells that are fused to dendritic cells, in the hope of further stimulating the immune system.

A possible advantage of tumor cell vaccines over antigen-based vaccines (described in the "Antigen vaccines" section) is that not all cancer antigens have been found yet. Using the whole tumor cell may expose the immune system to a large number of important cancer antigens, including some that researchers have not yet recognized. This may make them more effective. Also, dendritic cell-based vaccines may be better than antigen vaccines at recruiting other parts of the immune system to fight the cancer. They seem to be more likely to cause T cells to react against the cancer.

The 2 basic kinds of tumor cell vaccines are autologous and allogeneic.
Autologous vaccines

Autologous (pronounced aw-TAH-luh-gus) means "coming from the self." An autologous tumor cell vaccine is made from killed tumor cells taken from the same person in whom they will later be used. In other words, cells are taken from you (during surgery), the vaccine is made from them in a lab, and the cells are injected back into you. Autologous cancer cells may be reinjected shortly after surgery, or they may be grown in the lab or frozen and given later.

Although autologous tumor cell vaccines are promising, there are some potential drawbacks:

It can be expensive to create a new, unique vaccine for each patient.
Cancer cells tend to mutate (change) over time, so an autologous tumor vaccine might become less effective later if the cancer cells in your body change.
Depending on the surgery and the size of your tumor(s), you may not have enough usable cells in the removed tumor to make a vaccine, or there may not be enough to re-treat if the cancer starts growing again.

Because of these problems, researchers are also looking at ways to create tumor cell vaccines that could work in any patient with that particular kind of cancer.
Allogeneic vaccines

Allogeneic (pronounced a-loh-jeh-NAY-ik) means "coming from another." These vaccines use cells of a particular cancer type that originally came from someone other than the patient being treated.

Allogeneic vaccines are easier to make than autologous vaccines. They are more like off-the-shelf drugs than a vaccine made for just one person. The cells for the vaccine are grown in the lab from a stock of cancer cells kept for that purpose. Some allogeneic tumor vaccines use a mixture of cells which were removed from several patients. The cells are treated and are usually injected along with one or more adjuvant substances to stimulate the immune system.
Types of cancers for which tumor cell vaccines are being studied

Although the FDA has not yet approved any tumor cell vaccines for general use, they are being studied in clinical trials against many types of cancer, including:

Melanoma
Kidney cancer
Ovarian cancer
Breast cancer
Colorectal cancer
Lung cancer
Prostate cancer
Non-Hodgkin lymphoma
Leukemia

Antigen vaccines

Antigen vaccines boost the immune system by using only one antigen (or a few), rather than whole tumor cells that contain many thousands of antigens. The antigens are usually proteins or pieces of proteins called peptides. Antigen vaccines may be specific for a certain type of cancer, but they are not made for a unique patient like autologous cell vaccines are.

Scientists have learned how to mass-produce many antigens in the lab. They can also change these antigens to make them more easily recognized by the immune system. This new technology means that large amounts of these very specific antigens can now be given to many patients.

Some antigens cause an immune response only in patients with a certain kind of cancer, while others produce immune reactions to more than one kind of cancer. Scientists often combine several antigens in a vaccine to try to get a stronger immune response.

Antigen vaccines are being studied to be used against these cancers, among others:

Breast cancer
Prostate cancer
Colorectal cancer
Ovarian cancer
Melanoma
Kidney cancer
Pancreatic cancer
Multiple myeloma

Dendritic cell vaccines

Dendritic cells are special antigen-presenting cells that help the immune system recognize cancer cells. They break down cancer cells into smaller pieces (including antigens), then hold out, or "present," these antigens to T cells. This makes it easier for the immune system cells to recognize and attack them. Dendritic cells are the most effective antigen-presenting cells known.

Dendritic cell vaccines are autologous vaccines, and must be made individually for each patient. The process used to create them is complex and expensive:

Doctors remove some of the cells that grow into dendritic cells (from the blood) and treat them in the lab to make them multiply and turn into dendritic cells. This creates many more dendritic cells than if they just used cells taken from the patient. These dendritic cells are then exposed to cancer cells or cancer antigens.
Other methods are to change their genes so that they make their own antigens or to fuse the dendritic cells with tumor cells. These procedures lead to dendritic cells with cancer antigens on their surface.
The dendritic cells are then injected back into the body.

The dendritic cells that have cancer antigens on their surface are better able to help the immune system recognize and destroy cancer cells that have those antigens on them.

The dendritic cell vaccine approach has shown promise in tests in lab animals and in some human studies. They are only available through clinical trials at this time. They are being studied for use in people with these and other cancers:

Prostate cancer
Melanoma
Kidney cancer
Colorectal cancer
Lung cancer
Breast cancer
Leukemia
Non-Hodgkin lymphoma

Sipuleucel-T (Provenge) is an example of a dendritic cell vaccine.
Anti-idiotype vaccines

Every B cell or plasma cell makes only one kind of antibody. The unique part of each type of antibody is called an idiotype.

Antibodies are made when the immune system responds to antigens. But the immune system also makes some antibodies that treat other antibodies like antigens. In other words, sometimes the body makes antibodies against other antibodies. Scientists believe these antibodies against antibodies are important in helping to keep the immune system in check.

Antibodies and antigens fit together like a lock and key. So an antibody to a particular idiotype of another antibody (an anti-idiotype) will usually look like the antigen that triggered cells to make the antibody in the first place (like using the lock itself to make an extra key). Because the anti-idiotype antibodies look like the antigen and appear foreign, injecting them into the body causes the immune system to attack the anti-idiotypes, along with the antigens themselves.

Scientists have learned how to make these anti-idiotype antibodies in the lab. They can be used as part of a cancer vaccine because they look like the antigens on the cancer cells in the patient's body. Therefore, they can trigger an immune response against that specific cancer.

Researchers consider lymphomas to be the most promising targets for anti-idiotype vaccines. This is because all lymphoma cells have unique antigen receptors not present on normal lymphocytes or other normal cells of the body. These unique antigens can be used to make lymphoma vaccines. Early studies of B-cell lymphoma vaccines have been promising.
DNA vaccines

When tumor cells or antigens are injected into the body as a vaccine, they may cause the desired immune response at first, but they may become less effective over time. This is because the immune system recognizes them as foreign and quickly destroys them. Without any further stimulation, the immune system often returns to its normal (pre-vaccine) state of activity. To get around this, scientists have looked for a way to provide a steady supply of antigens to keep the immune response going.

DNA is the substance in cells that contains the genetic code for the proteins that cells make. Cells can be injected with bits of DNA that code for protein antigens. This DNA might be taken up by cells and instruct them to keep making more antigens. These types of therapies are called DNA vaccines.

Scientists may be able to do this by removing some of your cells, treating them with DNA that codes for a certain antigen, and then returning them to you. The altered cells would then make the antigen on an ongoing basis to keep the immune response strong.

DNA vaccines are now being studied in clinical trials for use against the following cancers, among others:

Melanoma
Leukemia
Prostate cancer
Head and neck cancer

Not all cancer treatments using DNA focus on the immune system. There are other types of experimental therapy that use DNA to treat cancer cells directly by replacing the damaged genes responsible for the cells' abnormal growth. Some add new genes that make the cancer cells more sensitive to anti-cancer drugs. For more information, please see our document, Gene Therapy.
Vector-based vaccines

These vaccines use special delivery systems (called vectors) to make them more effective. They aren't really a separate category of vaccine; for example, there are vector-based antigen vaccines and vector-based DNA vaccines.

Vectors are special viruses, bacteria, yeast cells, or other structures that can be used to get antigens or DNA into the body. The vectors are often germs that have been altered to make sure they can no longer cause disease.

Vectors may be helpful in making vaccines for a number of reasons. First, they may be used to deliver more than one cancer antigen at a time, which may make the body's immune system more likely to mount a response. Second, vectors such as viruses and bacteria may trigger their own immune responses from the body, which may help make the overall immune response even stronger. Finally, these vaccines may be easier and less expensive to make than some other vaccines. Many clinical trials of vector-based vaccines are now under way.
Other active specific immunotherapies

Some forms of active immunotherapy are not considered cancer vaccines. Vaccines try to get the body's immune system to react to specific antigens, and these therapies try to boost specific parts of the immune system
Lymphokine-activated killer cell therapy

Scientists can make large numbers of active, cancer-fighting T cells in the lab by treating a small number of killer T cells in a test tube with a cytokine (an immune system growth factor) called interleukin-2 (IL-2). After being returned to a patient's bloodstream, these special cells, now called lymphokine-activated killer cells (or LAK cells), are more effective against cancer cells. Researchers are now testing several ways to use these very active cancer-fighting cells.

LAK cell therapy has shown promising results in animal studies, where it shrunk tumors in animals with lung, liver, and other cancers. Although clinical trials in humans have not yet been as successful, researchers are constantly improving LAK cell techniques. They are testing these newly improved methods against melanoma, brain tumors, and other cancers.
Tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte vaccine with interleukin-2

Researchers have found immune system cells deep inside some tumors and have named these cells tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs). These cells can be removed from tumor samples taken from patients and made to reproduce in the lab by treating them with IL-2. When injected back into the patient, these cells can be active cancer fighters. This is a type of autologous vaccine.

Success with TILs in lab animals has led researchers to try to increase the anti-tumor activity of TILs. Treatments using TILs are being tested in clinical trials in people with melanoma, kidney cancer, and other cancers.

In one study, researchers from the National Cancer Institute used a newer technique with TILs in patients with advanced melanoma. After removing TILs from the body and increasing their numbers, the researchers treated the patients with chemotherapy to reduce the numbers of other white blood cells in the body. When the TILs were given back into the body, the tumors shrank in about half of the patients, and almost all of the patients lived longer than expected. The results were promising, but the researchers weren't able to get TILs from all of the patients. This limited the treatment's effectiveness, in that it couldn't be used for everyone.

More recently, the researchers took T cells from the blood of patients with advanced melanoma. In the lab, they inserted genes into them that made them more likely to recognize melanoma cells. When the T cells were injected back into the patients, 2 out of 17 had their tumors shrink. Although it did not work for everyone, it marked the first time that a form of gene therapy has helped treat people with cancer.
Suppressing regulatory T cells

Regulatory T cells normally act as brakes to help keep the immune system in check. They help keep it from overreacting and attacking normal cells in the body. But they may also slow the immune system's ability to attack cancer cells. Researchers are now studying whether suppressing these cells might allow the immune system to be more effective against cancer. This approach may be even more effective when combined with a tumor vaccine.

In an early study of this approach, researchers used the drug denileukin diftitox (Ontak, which is described in the "Other targeted therapies containing toxins" section) to suppress regulatory T cells in patients with advanced melanoma. Several people in the study had their tumors shrink. Although the early results are encouraging, it's not yet clear how safe it is to take some of the brakes off the immune system, or if doing so might lead to other problems such as autoimmune diseases.
Non-specific immunotherapies and adjuvants

Non-specific immunotherapies do not target a certain cell or antigen. They stimulate the immune system in a very general way, but this may still result in more activity against cancer cells.

Some non-specific immunotherapies can be given as treatments. Others are used as adjuvants (along with a main treatment) to boost immune system function to improve how well another therapy (such as a vaccine) works. And some immunotherapies are used by themselves against some cancers and as adjuvants against others.
Cytokines

Cytokines (pronounced SY-toh-kines) are chemicals made by immune system cells. They have a crucial role in regulating the growth and activity of other immune system cells and blood cells.

At this time, cytokines are often used in cancer treatment to lessen the side effects of other treatments such as chemotherapy. Man-made versions of cytokines can help the bone marrow make more white blood cells, red blood cells, or platelets when their levels in the body have gotten too low. While this is important in cancer treatment, it isn't truly immunotherapy.

But man-made versions of cytokines are also being used to boost the immune system and as adjuvants, which can be given along with tumor vaccines.

Cytokines are given as injections, either under the skin, into a muscle, or into a vein. The most common ones are discussed here.
Interleukins

Interleukins are a group of cytokines that act as chemical signals between white blood cells. When interleukin-2 (IL-2) was approved by the FDA in 1992 to treat advanced kidney cancer, it became the first true immunotherapy approved for use alone in treating cancer. Since that time, it has also been approved to treat people with metastatic melanoma.

IL-2 can be used as a single drug treatment for these cancers, or it may be combined with other forms of immunotherapy, such as vaccines. IL-2 helps immune system cells grow and divide more quickly.

Using IL-2 with chemotherapy or with other cytokines (such as interferon-alfa) may make these treatments more effective against some cancers. The side effects of the combined treatment are also increased.

Side effects of IL-2 may include flu-like symptoms such as chills, fever, fatigue, and confusion. Most people gain weight. Some have nausea, vomiting, or diarrhea. Many people develop low blood pressure, which can be treated with other medicines. An abnormal heartbeat occurs in less than 10% of patients. Chest pain and serious heart problems are rare. Because of these side effects, high doses of IL-2 must be given to the patient in the hospital (as an inpatient).

Other interleukins, such as IL-7, IL-12, and IL-21, are now being studied for use against cancer too, both as adjuvants and as stand-alone agents.
Interferons

This family of cytokines, first discovered in the late 1950s, helps the body resist virus infections and cancers. The types of interferon (IFN) are named after the first 3 letters of the Greek alphabet: IFN-alfa, IFN-beta, and IFN-gamma. Although all 3 types of interferon are FDA approved to treat health conditions, only IFN-alfa is used to treat cancer. Not all of its actions are well understood, but it may work by:

Directly slowing the growth of cancer cells
Slowing down angiogenesis, the growth of new blood vessels that tumors must have in order to grow
Causing cancer cells to produce more antigens, making them easier for the immune system to see and destroy
Boosting the cancer cell-killing ability of natural killer (NK) cells and of other immune system cells that attack cancer with help from antibodies

The FDA has approved IFN-alfa for use against these cancers:

Hairy cell leukemia
Chronic myelogenous leukemia
Follicular non-Hodgkin lymphoma
Cutaneous (affecting the skin) T-cell lymphoma
Kidney cancer
Melanoma
Kaposi sarcoma

Side effects of interferons may include flu-like symptoms (chills, fever, headache, fatigue, loss of appetite, nausea, vomiting), low white blood cell counts (which increase the risk of infection), skin rashes, and thinning hair. These side effects can be severe, and make treatment with interferon hard to tolerate for many people.

Most side effects do not last long after the treatment stops, but fatigue can last longer. Other rare long-term effects include damage to nerves, including those in the brain and spinal cord.

Granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor

Granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) is a cytokine/growth factor that causes the bone marrow to make more of certain types of immune system cells and blood cells. This includes monocytes, macrophages, and dendritic cells. It also boosts the production of other blood cells. A man-made version (also known as sargramostim or Leukine®) is often used to boost white blood cell counts after chemotherapy.

GM-CSF is also being tested against cancer as a non-specific immunotherapy and as an adjuvant given with other types of immunotherapies. Clinical trials of GM-CSF, alone or with other immunotherapies, are being done in people with many different types of cancer.

Common side effects of GM-CSF include flu-like symptoms (fever, headaches, muscle aches), rashes, facial flushing, and bone pain.

Adjuvants other than cytokines

Many other compounds are known to boost the activity of the immune system and are now being studied as possible adjuvants, particularly for use with vaccine therapies. Some of the most commonly studied adjuvants are listed below, but many more are being developed.
Bacille Calmette-Guérin

Bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG) is a bacterium that is related to the germ that causes tuberculosis. Unlike its bacterial "cousin," BCG does not cause serious disease in humans, but it does infect human tissues and helps activate the immune system.

This makes BCG useful as a form of cancer immunotherapy. BCG was one of the earliest immunotherapies used against cancer and it is still being used today. It is FDA-approved as a routine treatment for early stage bladder cancer.

Its usefulness in other cancers as an adjuvant is also being tested. Researchers are looking at injecting BCG to give an added boost to the immune system when using chemotherapy, radiation therapy, or other types of immunotherapy.
Keyhole limpet hemocyanin

Keyhole limpet hemocyanin (KLH) is an adjuvant used to boost the effectiveness of cancer vaccine therapies. It is extracted from a type of sea creature related to the snail.
Incomplete Freund's adjuvant

Incomplete Freund's adjuvant (IFA) is given together with some experimental therapies to help stimulate the immune system and to increase the immune response to cancer vaccines. IFA is a water-in-oil emulsion that stimulates the T-cell immune response to antigens.
QS-21

QS-21 is a fairly new immune stimulant made from a plant extract that increases the immune response to some cancer vaccines.
DETOX ™

DETOX is newer adjuvant. It is made from parts of the cell walls of bacteria and a kind of fat that also comes from bacteria. Since it was first made, other types have been created by using other methods, such as DETOX-B and DETOX-PC, one of which has been named Melacine®. It is used with various immunotherapies to boost the immune system.
Dinitrophenyl

Dinitrophenyl (DNP) is a small molecule that can attach to tumor antigens and boost immune response. It is used to modify tumor cells in certain cancer vaccines.
Clinical trials

You may have had to make a lot of decisions since you've been told you have cancer. One of the most important decisions you will make is choosing which treatment is best for you. You may have heard about clinical trials being done for your type of cancer. Or maybe someone on your health care team has mentioned a clinical trial to you.

Clinical trials are carefully controlled research studies that are done with patients who volunteer for them. They are done to get a closer look at promising new treatments or procedures.

If you would like to take part in a clinical trial, you should start by asking your doctor if your clinic or hospital conducts clinical trials. You can also call our clinical trials matching service for a list of clinical trials that meet your medical needs. You can reach this service at 1-800-303-5691 or on our Web site at http://clinicaltrials.cancer.org. You can also get a list of current clinical trials by calling the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Information Service toll-free at 1-800-4-CANCER (1-800-422-6237) or by visiting the NCI clinical trials Web site at www.cancer.gov/clinicaltrials.

There are requirements you must meet to take part in any clinical trial. If you do qualify for a clinical trial, it is up to you whether or not to enter (enroll in) it.

Clinical trials are one way to get state-of-the art cancer treatment. They are the only way for doctors to learn better methods to treat cancer. Still, they are not right for everyone.

You can get a lot more information on clinical trials in our document called Clinical Trials: What You Need to Know. You can read it on our Web site or call our toll-free number (1-800-227-2345) and have it sent to you.
Immunotherapy for specific cancers

The FDA has approved several cancer immunotherapies, including Bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG), interferon-alfa (IFN-alfa), interleukin-2 (IL-2), and the monoclonal antibodies listed above.

Many other immunotherapies have shown promising results and are moving through the testing process in clinical trials. The cancers listed here are being studied most intensively, but treatments for other cancers are also being looked at.
Breast cancer

In terms of immunotherapy, only monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) have been approved for use against breast cancer so far. But many other forms of treatment are being studied.

The MAb trastuzumab (Herceptin) is used in women with breast cancer whose cancer cells have too many copies of the HER2/neu gene. These genes make extra receptors for growth-stimulating factors on the cells, which results in a more aggressive form of breast cancer. Trastuzumab attaches to the receptors, blocking the access of the growth factors to the cancer cells and slowing their growth. Other HER2/neu antibodies are now being studied in clinical trials.
Bevacizumab (Avastin), a monoclonal antibody that slows blood vessel growth in tumors, is being studied along with chemotherapy in some women with advanced breast cancer.
Some interferons and interleukins have shown promise against breast cancer, particularly when used along with tumor vaccines or immunotoxins.
Autologous vaccine therapy has lengthened remission and survival times of some women with early breast cancer. This approach is being studied further.
A HER2/neu peptide (a small part of the protein made by the HER2/neu gene), used as the antigen in a vaccine, has been shown to cause an increased immune response against the HER2/neu receptor on cancer cells; it is under study.
Other specific antigen vaccines are also promising. These vaccines are almost always used after primary therapy (lumpectomy and radiation therapy, or mastectomy) and sometimes together with hormonal therapy or chemotherapy, to try to keep the cancer from coming back.

Cervical cancer

Infection with the human papilloma virus (HPV) plays an important role in causing cervical cancer. HPV vaccines are now approved for use to help prevent cervical cancer. Other vaccines that may help treat this cancer are now being tested in clinical trials.

Some HPV vaccines are like more traditional vaccines, which work against infections. They are intended to make women immune to HPV, so that when they are exposed to these viruses they will not develop long-term infections. By avoiding persistent HPV infection, most cervical cancers may be prevented. Two vaccines (Gardasil® and Cervarix®) can protect against most infections from the 2 types of HPV that cause 70% of cervical cancers. These vaccines are used mainly in girls and young women, although Gardasil is approved for use in boys and young men as well (to help prevent genital warts).
Other vaccines are now being studied to help women who already have advanced cervical cancer. These vaccines try to cause an immune reaction to the parts of the virus that contribute to the growth of cervical cancer cells. This may kill the cancer cells or stop them from growing.
Interferons and interleukins are also being studied in women with metastatic cervical cancer.

Colorectal cancer

Several monoclonal antibodies are now used to treat colorectal cancer. Clinical trials are also being done using vaccines and many other immunotherapies as adjuvants to surgery, with and without chemotherapy.

Bevacizumab (Avastin) is a monoclonal antibody against vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). By attacking VEGF, the antibody stops tumors from being able to form new blood vessels. It is used along with chemotherapy against advanced colorectal cancer.
Cetuximab (Erbitux) is a monoclonal antibody that attacks the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), which normally signals cancer cells to grow and divide. It is used against advanced colorectal cancer, usually along with chemotherapy, in people whose cancer is no longer responding to other treatments.
Another monoclonal antibody, panitumumab (Vectibix), also targets EGFR. Unlike cetuximab, this MAb has no parts that come from a mouse, so it may be less likely to cause an allergic reaction when it is given. Panitumumab is used to treat advanced colorectal cancer.
A number of autologous and allogeneic tumor cell vaccines have shown early promise, but so far none have improved patient survival time.
Some carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) vaccines have improved the immune response (measured by blood tests) in a large percentage of colorectal cancer patients, but the studies have not been going on long enough to see whether this improves remission or survival times.

Kidney cancer

Immunotherapy has been studied a great deal for advanced kidney cancer, least in part because other treatments like chemotherapy often aren't helpful.

Two cytokines, IL-2 and IFN-alfa, are treatment options for people with advanced kidney cancer.
Whole tumor cell vaccines given along with the adjuvant BCG have shrunk tumors in a small number of people with advanced kidney cancer.
Researchers are studying DNA vaccines that insert genes (segments of DNA) into cancer cells, causing the cells to make cytokines. These cytokines help the immune system recognize the cancer cells and also help activate immune system cells to attack those cells.
Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) are also being studied to fight kidney cancer. They can be removed from the body and stimulated in the lab by cytokines. When put back into the body, they become more effective than untreated cells from the bloodstream.
Bevacizumab (Avastin), a monoclonal antibody that slows blood vessel growth in tumors, is approved for use against kidney cancer.

Leukemias, lymphomas, and myelomas

Several immunotherapies are now used to treat these blood cell cancers, and many more are being studied.

Interferon-alfa can be used to treat people with hairy cell leukemia, chronic myelogenous leukemia, follicular lymphoma, multiple myeloma, and cutaneous (skin) T cell lymphoma. In some cases, interferon is used along with chemotherapy.
Denileukin diftitox (Ontak), a combination of IL-2 and diphtheria toxin, is sometimes used to treat cutaneous T cell lymphoma.
Rituximab (Rituxan), a monoclonal antibody (MAb), is used to treat some kinds of B cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Clinical trials are currently testing rituximab against other lymphomas, leukemias, multiple myeloma, and other diseases.
Ibritumomab tiuxetan (Zevalin) and tositumomab (Bexxar) are radiolabeled monoclonal antibodies used to treat non-Hodgkin lymphoma, usually in people who aren't helped by other treatments such as chemotherapy or rituximab. They are now being tested to see if they might be helpful earlier in the course of this disease.
Alemtuzumab (Campath) is an antibody used to treat B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).
Ofatumumab (Arzerra) is another antibody used to treat CLL, usually in people whose leukemia is no longer responding to other treatments. It is also being studied for use in other types of cancer.
Several other MAbs are being studied in clinical trials for people with leukemia, lymphoma, and multiple myeloma. Anti-idiotype vaccines have shown promising results in clinical trials against B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas, but are not yet FDA approved.

Lung cancer

Better treatments are needed for lung cancer, especially for advanced disease. Immunotherapy may help people live longer without the severe side effects sometimes seen with chemotherapy. Thus far, only monoclonal antibodies have been approved for use against lung cancer, although many other forms of immunotherapy are being studied.

The monoclonal antibody bevacizumab (Avastin) slows the growth of tumor blood vessels by targeting the VEGF protein. For patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), it can be added to standard chemotherapy and it may help them live longer than chemotherapy alone.
GVAX is an autologous whole cell vaccine. It is made by removing cancer cells from the patient during surgery and changing them in the lab so that they make GM-CSF (to help stimulate the immune system). The cells are irradiated so they can't multiply. They are then injected back into the patient to cause an immune response. Early studies of patients with advanced NSCLC have shown some responses to this vaccine, but further studies are needed.
BLP25 is a peptide (antigen) vaccine that is encased in a fat droplet (liposome) to make it work better. A small study of patients with advanced NSCLC suggested it may improve survival time. Larger studies are needed to confirm this.

Melanoma

Melanoma is probably the most-studied cancer when it comes to immunotherapy. Part of this is because doctors think this cancer may be more vulnerable to immune system responses. In rare cases, these cancers have been seen to shrink or even disappear without treatment. It is thought that this may be because of an effective immune response by the body.

Another reason immunotherapy has been studied more in melanoma is because other treatments, like chemotherapy, don't work as well against this cancer as they do for most cancers.

The cytokines IFN-alfa and IL-2 are approved to treat people with metastatic melanoma.
The non-specific immune stimulant BCG has not been shown to prolong life or delay relapse when used alone, but it is being tested along with melanoma vaccines and other immunotherapies. It is sometimes used to help treat stage III melanomas by injecting it directly into tumors.
Although no melanoma vaccines are FDA-approved yet, recent studies have found that some autologous and allogeneic tumor cell vaccines, as well as antigen vaccines, have shrunk tumors and helped some patients live longer. Dendritic cell vaccines have also been shown to shrink tumors in some patients. Some newer studies combine vaccines with IL-2 or newer adjuvants to further stimulate the immune reaction. Studies continue.
A small study showed that treating patients with tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), immune system cells found in tumors, could shrink melanoma tumors and possibly prolong life too. More studies using TILs are being done now. Another study found that T cells from the blood that had their genes altered in the lab caused tumors to shrink in a small number of patients.
Very early study results have suggested that suppressing regulatory T cells with denileukin diftitox (Ontak) can allow the immune system to fight cancers better, making some tumors shrink. A current study is looking to see if combining Ontak with a vaccine will help the vaccine work better.
Clinical trials are continuing for these and other melanoma immunotherapies.

Ovarian cancer

Immunotherapy is not used routinely to treat ovarian cancer. Several types of immunotherapy, including cancer vaccines and MAbs, are now being studied.

Injection of interleukin-2 (IL-2) directly into the peritoneal cavity (the part of the belly that contains the ovaries, uterus, and digestive organs) of women with recurrent ovarian cancer is being studied. Early studies suggest the treatment may increase the length of remissions (periods of time with no signs of cancer) after surgery.
Placing tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) along with interleukin-2 directly into the peritoneal cavity has also shown promise and is being studied.
Trastuzumab (Herceptin), a monoclonal antibody, is being studied to see if it may help the roughly 20% of women with ovarian cancer whose cells have too many copies of the HER2/neu gene.
A monoclonal antibody that attaches to certain antigens on both ovarian cancer cells and to certain spots on T cells (a bispecific antibody) has shown promise when used with IL-2. The antibody causes T cells to bind to and attack the cancer cells.
Early studies have shown that radiolabeled MAbs against ovarian cancer may help more women live longer.
Several forms of antigen vaccines are being studied to treat ovarian cancer.

Prostate cancer

Immunotherapy has not been a routine part of treating prostate cancer treatment. This may change with the approval of sipuleucel-T (Provenge). Most other prostate cancer immunotherapies now being studied are vaccines. They are designed to cause immune responses to antigens present only on prostate cells, such as prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA).

For sipuleucel-T (Provenge) white blood cells are removed from a patient's bloodstream and treated in the lab with a prostate cancer antigen and other substances to become dendritic cells. When put back in to the patient, the dendritic cells can show this antigen to other immune system cells, which are then better able to recognize and attack the cancer cells. When used to treat men with hormone-refractory prostate cancer, this vaccine helped them live longer.

GVAX is an autologous whole cell vaccine. It is made by removing cancer cells from the patient during surgery and modifying them in the lab to express GM-CSF (to help stimulate the immune system). The cells are irradiated so they can't grow any more. They are then injected back into the patient to cause an immune response. Early studies of patients with advanced prostate cancer that no longer responded to hormone therapy have shown some promising results in terms of survival time. This vaccine is now being tested against the current standard chemotherapy regimen for prostate cancer.

Researchers also are looking into using a part of the prostate-specific antigen (called a peptide) as the basis of a vaccine.
DNA vaccines, monoclonal antibodies, and cytokines have also shown promise and are being tested in clinical trials.

[mjmacky]

Like you'd understand any of that. The issue here is that NK cells don't adapt or progress, they are a stagnant immune response that doesn't change from the day you are born. It doesn't learn how to fight off new types of infection or how to deal with mutated species that circumvent. So if you would like to equate that with the conservative mind with respect to purging liberal/progressive ideas, you could convert it to a very apt metaphor.

[clocker]

When do we think 9 will realize that long copy/pastes are not the equivalent of a well reasoned argument?

Bludgeoning by word block is sooo yesterday.

[mjmacky]

When do we think 9 will realize that long copy/pastes are not the equivalent of a well reasoned argument?

Bludgeoning by word block is sooo yesterday.

I think it's because he doesn't comprehend them well enough to paraphrase since whenever he's tried in the past, his argument was viciously disassembled due to his failure to provide an astute analysis. That's my take on it anyhow.

[clocker]

Is it fair to point out that the children who grow up thinking that Jesus rode dinosaurs had no say in the contract either?
In case you thought I was engaging in hyperbole...

A company called Accelerated Christian Education (ACE), whose textbooks have been approved for use in Louisiana schools under the voucher system, claims that the Loch Ness monster exists and proves that evolution is incorrect and that the "Master Craftsman" (who is not Norm Abrams, much to my surprise) directed the origin of species.
Full story here. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/25/louisiana-students-loch-ness-monster-disprove-evolution_n_1624643.html)

Yup, that's how you educate the next generation of burger flippers and WalMart greeters.

[mjmacky]

My textbooks say that Louisiana is full of Jesus-freak inbreds.

[999969999]

Hey everybody! I'm back from my vacation. After spending so much time in Oregon I had become quite pale, but you will be happy to know that after just about 3 weeks in Southern California, I no longer look like an Austrian vampire!


To get this thread back on topic, let's discuss the dominoes which are starting to fall...

City governments which have been bankrupted by union wages, benefits, and pensions...



"City workforce files class action suit against Scranton for cutting salaries to minimum wage



[In my opinion, this is a bold move in the right direction-- slash their pay down to a sustainable level!]



Civil service workers in Scranton, Pa., still reeling from having their pay slashed en masse to the minimum wage, have filed a class action lawsuit against the beleaguered city and its mayor, who defied a judge’s order not to cut salaries.

The suit was filed by six Scranton police officers and firefighters in a Pennsylvania federal court Tuesday afternoon, but it covers them and "all other persons similarly situated,” saying that the collective action was against a violation from the Fair Labor Standards Act.

“The law is clear. You cannot violate a workers contract,” Thomas Jennings, an attorney who is representing three Scranton civil service unions, told FoxNews.com as he was preparing Monday to file multiple suits against the city and its Mayor Christopher Doherty.

Doherty cut everyone's pay -- including his own -- on Friday down to the state minimum of $7.25 per hour, saying the state's sixth-largest city is broke because the City Council blocked his proposed tax increase in a 2012 budget proposal.

The salary cuts are the latest in a long-standing stalemate between the mayor and the City Council, with the town’s employees stuck in the middle.

“This is a case where our local politicians can’t get it together,” Jennings said. “It’s not that they don’t have the money. It’s that he [Doherty] doesn’t want to get the money needed.”

Mayor Doherty has not responded to numerous requests from FoxNews.com for comment.

Also filed in federal court on Tuesday was a lawsuit on behalf of 10 retired Scranton cops and firefighters out on disability leave who had their benefits reduced.

A complaint petition was also filed in Lackawanna County Court arguing that Doherty had violated a judge’s order barring the Mayor from cutting wages.

The city of Scranton has battled budget woes for the past two decades, registering under the Distressed Municipalities Act, but the problems reached a boiling point after the City Council blocked Doherty's plan to raise taxes to cover a $16.8 million shortfall, opting instead to borrow money to cover the budget gap.

“Scranton is infamous as being economically depressed,” Anthony Figliola, vice president of Empire Government Strategies and former deputy supervisor for Brookhaven, N.Y., where he oversaw 500 employees and a $200 million budget, told FoxNews.com.

“The mayor is calling them [city council] on their bluff, but at the expense of the taxpayers. There’s a lot of things that could be done that they just aren’t doing," Figliola said.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/10/scranton-civil-servants-file-class-action-lawsuit-against-city-mayor-for/#ixzz20ne5wjIN


And....


"Third City In California Votes to Seek Bankruptcy
By IAN LOVETT
Published: July 11, 2012




LOS ANGELES — San Bernardino will become the third California city to file for bankruptcy this year, after officials conceded the city might not even be able to cover payroll through the summer.

Faced with a budget shortfall of $45 million and city coffers that have already been drained, the San Bernardino City Council voted on Tuesday to file for bankruptcy. Andrea Travis-Miller, the interim city manager, told Council members before the vote that the city had very few options left.

“I am concerned about our ability to make payroll, not only in the next 30 days but also in the next 60 to 90 days,” Ms. Travis-Miller said. “A major restructuring of this organization is needed.”

Ms. Travis-Miller said it would take 30 days before city staff would be prepared to file the paperwork in bankruptcy court.

Under a California law passed this year, cities must hire a third-party mediator to negotiate with employee unions and creditors before filing for Chapter 9 bankruptcy protections. However, cities can avoid this mediation process if they instead declare a fiscal emergency, which Mayor Patrick Morris said that San Bernardino planned to do.

Karol K. Denniston, a partner at the law firm Schiff Hardin who helped draft the mediation legislation, said a long and difficult bankruptcy case might follow, because the city had skipped the mediation process.

With 15 percent unemployment in the city, and a foreclosure rate in San Bernardino County that remains among the highest in the state, San Bernardino has been pummeled by the recession.

As a result, the city’s revenues have plummeted in recent years, while pension costs have continued to rise. Previous budget cuts were not enough to keep the city out of the red.

James Penman, the city attorney, called the loss of redevelopment funds, which the state cut off in an effort to close its own budget deficit, “the straw that broke the camel’s back.”

Unlike Stockton and Mammoth Lakes, however, whose financial problems were long known before those cities filed for bankruptcy, even the mayor said he did not know just how dire San Bernardino’s financial situation was until a few weeks ago.

Over the past 16 years, according to Mr. Penman, city budget officials had presented falsified documents to the mayor and the City Council that showed the city’s finances in the black, when in fact they were in the red for 13 of those years. Only two weeks ago, Mr. Morris said, did he learn that the city was “in for a world of hurt.”

Still, Mr. Morris said the city’s financial crisis had been many years in the making, with a lack of reserve funds exposed by the financial crisis.

“This is a long time coming,” Mr. Morris said. “This is not something that happened like a lightning flash.”

[999969999]

For Comrade Macky:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxuBhemD3nk


Macky confirms most of what I have suspected about the Left:

He admits to being a member of a union.

He admits to being a socialist.

He admits to being an anarchist. [Chaos]

He is extremely arrogant-- thinks he knows more about cancer than the American Cancer Society.

He openly states that he wants to destroy the United States, it's capitalist system, and burn it down. [Chaos]


Think about that for a minute. Here is someone who has lived in (in my opinion) the best country in the world, with the highest standard of living, and yet he wants to destroy it. People from all over the world want to come here, but it is not good enough for him.

That is the LEFT.

[clocker]

Think about that for a minute. Here is someone who has lived in (in my opinion) the best country in the world, with the highest standard of living, and yet he wants to destroy it. People from all over the world want to come here, but it is not good enough for him.

That is the LEFT.
Outside of your fevered imagination, have you any proof that the US has the "highest standard of living" in the world?
According to the UN, unadjusted data ranks the US as 4th, adjusted for income inequality (a new factor used beginning in 2011), the US ranks 23rd.

Out of respect for j2k4 I'll not label you a conservative but you're certainly the poster boy for the modern day Republican party- all rhetoric, no facts.

[mjmacky]

For Comrade Macky:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxuBhemD3nk


Macky confirms most of what I have suspected about the Left:

He admits to being a member of a union.

He admits to being a socialist.

He admits to being an anarchist. [Chaos]

He is extremely arrogant-- thinks he knows more about cancer than the American Cancer Society.

He openly states that he wants to destroy the United States, it's capitalist system, and burn it down. [Chaos]


Think about that for a minute. Here is someone who has lived in (in my opinion) the best country in the world, with the highest standard of living, and yet he wants to destroy it. People from all over the world want to come here, but it is not good enough for him.

That is the LEFT.

Something tells me that any youtube you link without even a title hint would be something terribly uninteresting.

Also, you can call me left, but I prefer cardinal directions. The legal ignorants fear that the "left" is like me, when they're basically midpoint between myself and the "right". Socialist, check. Anarchist, check (not surprised you don't know what anarchy is). Arrogant, check, though I think it is universally obvious that I know a lot more about cancer than what you tried to understand from an American Cancer Society web page. Destroy the infidels, check.

Final quip. I don't understand the appeal of living in any one place for one's entire life. I'm not a fan of any government really, so once I'm finished with my business here, I intend to be a world resident not having to really bother myself with the long term political nuances of each. It's also odd that you would even consider to mention standard of living since it's a concept almost entirely contained in the "socialist" domain. Incidentally, countries with more socialist policies tend to yield higher standards of living, given that they have some kind of economic value (thus can afford to go into debt).

[999969999]

Think about that for a minute. Here is someone who has lived in (in my opinion) the best country in the world, with the highest standard of living, and yet he wants to destroy it. People from all over the world want to come here, but it is not good enough for him.

That is the LEFT.
Outside of your fevered imagination, have you any proof that the US has the "highest standard of living" in the world?
According to the UN, unadjusted data ranks the US as 4th, adjusted for income inequality (a new factor used beginning in 2011), the US ranks 23rd.

Out of respect for j2k4 I'll not label you a conservative but you're certainly the poster boy for the modern day Republican party- all rhetoric, no facts.

Do you honestly think I would care what the U.N. thinks about our standard of living? They lie all the time and hate us. Why would I care about what they have to say about us?

But earlier you mentioned Sweden as a shining example of a socialist country with a high standard of living. I've been there with my family on several trips. While it is a nice place to visit, I was so happy to get back home after the vacation was over. I would not want to live there.

Let's take nearby Finland as a better example-- one which I am quite familiar with. I have relatives living in Lapland and Helsinki, and have visited them a number of times over the years. The ones in Helsinki have a 3 bedroom, 2 bathroom home, similar to what we would call a "town house" and they are so proud of it. I love them dearly, and I am happy for them, but their place is tiny. We have 7 bedrooms and 4 bathrooms in our Eagar home (and my grandparents' home in Eugene, Oregon is even bigger!). And here's the other thing... they only have one tiny car! And they hardly ever use it! They use mainly public transportation to get around in the city. Almost every time they took me anywhere, we had to use public transportation and it was okay, but not nearly as nice as riding in a car and getting to your destination quickly. It took forever to get anywhere!

So no, I don't think they have as high of a standard of living as we do. I wouldn't want to live like that. Once again, nice place to visit, and I had a lot of fun with my cousins, etc., but I was so happy to get back home.

[mjmacky]

Let's take nearby Finland as a better example-- one which I am quite familiar with. I have relatives living in Lapland and Helsinki, and have visited them a number of times over the years.

What are you foreigners doing in America in the first place, go back to your own country.

Also, unsurprisingly, you seem to be confused about what standard of living even means. Do you even know what statistics are?

[999969999]

Let's take nearby Finland as a better example-- one which I am quite familiar with. I have relatives living in Lapland and Helsinki, and have visited them a number of times over the years.

What are you foreigners doing in America in the first place, go back to your own country.

I was born here.

Also, unsurprisingly, you seem to be confused about what standard of living even means. Do you even know what statistics are?


"Lies, damned lies, and statistics" is a phrase describing the persuasive power of numbers, particularly the use of statistics to bolster weak arguments. It is also sometimes colloquially used to doubt statistics used to prove an opponent's point.

The term was popularised in the United States by Mark Twain (among others), who attributed it to the 19th-century British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli (1804–1881): "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." However, the phrase is not found in any of Disraeli's works and the earliest known appearances were years after his death. Other coiners have therefore been proposed."

In my opinion, going there in person and seeing what it is like is far better than reading what someone at the U.N. had to say about our standard of living compared to various European nations.

[mjmacky]

What are you foreigners doing in America in the first place, go back to your own country.

I was born here.

Also, unsurprisingly, you seem to be confused about what standard of living even means. Do you even know what statistics are?


"Lies, damned lies, and statistics" is a phrase describing the persuasive power of numbers, particularly the use of statistics to bolster weak arguments. It is also sometimes colloquially used to doubt statistics used to prove an opponent's point.

The term was popularised in the United States by Mark Twain (among others), who attributed it to the 19th-century British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli (1804–1881): "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." However, the phrase is not found in any of Disraeli's works and the earliest known appearances were years after his death. Other coiners have therefore been proposed."

In my opinion, going there in person and seeing what it is like is far better than reading what someone at the U.N. had to say about our standard of living compared to various European nations.

While statistics can be used for driving a purpose of mal-intent, making blanking statements about the condition of society using personal anecdotes works with only the lowest of minds, and it's only good for amusement at best. So, try to dodge all you want, you won't be able to gather things like nations' standard of living without statistical analysis.

P.S. You're saying that you were an anchor baby?

[clocker]

But earlier you mentioned Sweden as a shining example of a socialist country with a high standard of living. I've been there with my family on several trips. While it is a nice place to visit, I was so happy to get back home after the vacation was over. I would not want to live there.
I hear a sigh of relief so audible it crossed the Atlantic. Sweden thanks you.

Let's take nearby Finland as a better example-- one which I am quite familiar with. I have relatives living in Lapland and Helsinki, and have visited them a number of times over the years. The ones in Helsinki have a 3 bedroom, 2 bathroom home, similar to what we would call a "town house" and they are so proud of it. I love them dearly, and I am happy for them, but their place is tiny. We have 7 bedrooms and 4 bathrooms in our Eagar home (and my grandparents' home in Eugene, Oregon is even bigger!). And here's the other thing... they only have one tiny car! And they hardly ever use it! They use mainly public transportation to get around in the city. Almost every time they took me anywhere, we had to use public transportation and it was okay, but not nearly as nice as riding in a car and getting to your destination quickly. It took forever to get anywhere!

So no, I don't think they have as high of a standard of living as we do. I wouldn't want to live like that. Once again, nice place to visit, and I had a lot of fun with my cousins, etc., but I was so happy to get back home.
You conflate ostentatious consumerism with a high standard of living.
How many people live in your seven bedroom McMansion?
In your grandparents Versailles?

And gee, how stupid of the Finns to not be beholden to oil cartels by building and using public transportation.
They probably all secretly lust after Escalades, it's their damned socialist governments thwarting them.

[999969999]

For Comrade Macky:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxuBhemD3nk


Macky confirms most of what I have suspected about the Left:

He admits to being a member of a union.

He admits to being a socialist.

He admits to being an anarchist. [Chaos]

He is extremely arrogant-- thinks he knows more about cancer than the American Cancer Society.

He openly states that he wants to destroy the United States, it's capitalist system, and burn it down. [Chaos]


Think about that for a minute. Here is someone who has lived in (in my opinion) the best country in the world, with the highest standard of living, and yet he wants to destroy it. People from all over the world want to come here, but it is not good enough for him.

That is the LEFT.

Something tells me that any youtube you link without even a title hint would be something terribly uninteresting.

Also, you can call me left, but I prefer cardinal directions. The legal ignorants fear that the "left" is like me, when they're basically midpoint between myself and the "right". Socialist, check. Anarchist, check (not surprised you don't know what anarchy is). Arrogant, check, though I think it is universally obvious that I know a lot more about cancer than what you tried to understand from an American Cancer Society web page. Destroy the infidels, check.

Final quip. I don't understand the appeal of living in any one place for one's entire life. I'm not a fan of any government really, so once I'm finished with my business here, I intend to be a world resident not having to really bother myself with the long term political nuances of each. It's also odd that you would even consider to mention standard of living since it's a concept almost entirely contained in the "socialist" domain. Incidentally, countries with more socialist policies tend to yield higher standards of living, given that they have some kind of economic value (thus can afford to go into debt).

Thanks for your admission of guilt and thanks for proving my point.

You have made it quite clear that you are a traitor to our country. You hate our country and you want to destroy it.

The other Americans on this forum have had plenty of opportunities to voice their objections to your downright treasonous statements, and they act as if they do not recognize you as a threat to their very way of life, and yet if you had your way, you would destroy their country.

They have remained silent about it.

And the silence is deafening.

It also proves my point.

I know you are so arrogant and narcissistic that you think you know more about cancer than the American Cancer Society, but for the rest of the readers out there, here is the quote from the ACS.

"the immune system is much better at recognizing and attacking germs than cancer cells. Germs are very different from normal human cells and are often easily seen as foreign, but cancer cells and normal cells have fewer clear differences. Because of this the immune system may not always recognize cancer cells as foreign. Cancer cells are less like soldiers of an invading army and more like traitors within the ranks of the human cell population."

On a much larger scale, the t.v. news media is supposed to act as our immune system, and not sweep anything under the carpet. If they had done their job, Obama would have never been elected. He had almost no experience, and the only work experience he had outside of government jobs was at ACORN which should have been investigated extensively, and they should have also investigated the people with whom he associated, such as Rev. Wright, the Nation of Islam, etc. If the average American had been aware of these facts back then, I don't think he would have even made it through the primary. If the media had been fair, and treated him the way they treat Republicans and conservatives, they would have quickly made his run for the White House a losing proposition. But what do I expect? Look how the Nobel Peace Prize treated him?! They gave him the award eventhough he didn't earn it, in anticipation of what he might do someday in the future. They made a mockery of their own organization. It was a purely political move. They were all bending over backwards to kiss his feet.

And I know you are afraid to click on the youtube link of the Seinfeld episode where Kramer is a communist, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxuBhemD3nk
, so I will simply tell you what it is says: "This guy's a commie... traitor to our country!" Seinfeld was on television originally in the 1990s, and it is interesting to see how different their response back then is from our response today. Being called a commie is not such a big deal now. They have done a great job of infiltrating our schools, our media, and now even the highest levels of our government. As it turns out, McCarthy may have been right all along.

What is weird is why would we even want to try such a thing here when it has failed or is in the process of failing in every country it has ever been tried. The only reason some of the western European nations have been able to keep their socialist-lite governments functioning is because we acted as their military (they knew we would step in to defend them from any Russian invasion), so the money they saved on not having a huge military was free to use on their expensive social programs. If we ever closed down our bases in Europe and left NATO and the UN, they would have to fend for themselves, and suddenly they would find out that having all those social programs was simply too expensive to be sustainable, and they would probably abandon them

It is interesting to point out that the ones who are the least socialistic of the European countries, the Germans, are also the most industrious and in the best shape financially. Think about it. You see German cars everyday. How often do you see French cars around here? And the French are in serious financial trouble, too. Not as bad as Italy, Spain, Portugal, and Greece, but not nearly as good as Germany. The Germans are cutting back and getting their fiscal house in order. We could learn something from them. But then, I am a bit biased when it comes to the Germans. Hey, at least I admit it!

Now back to the public employee labor unions in Scranton, PA; Stockton, CA; and San Bernardino, CA. They aren't like the federal government. They can't simply print their way out of this mess. When the economy was going through its bubble inflation period, and times were good, the labor unions got too greedy and started jumping up their wages, benefits, and pensions. The hapless government officials didn't give a damn about the money. Why should they care? It's not their money. It's the taxpayers' money. So, they gave in to the unions' outrageous demands. Then bubble burst, and tax revenues fell. Suddenly the very highly paid union workers were being paid more than these cities could take in, and since they can't get away with running a deficit and borrowing more and more money-- like the feds-- they had to make huge cuts in spending. The unions refused to negotiate, so they left them no choice but to file bankruptcy.

This is just the tip of the iceberg. This will happen in every city which has been foolish with its money and allowed the unions to run the show. The good thing about this is that it will open some average Americans' eyes to the problems of letting a politician bargain with a union using taxpayer money. It's one thing if a business voluntarily decides that it wants to bargain with a union (although I would never do such a thing) using its own money. It is quite another thing when a politician uses taxpayers' money to bargain with a union. Right To Work laws need to passed in every state, and there need to be laws which specifically state that public employee unions are forbidden from state and local government jobs. There was recently a bus strike in Arizona-- a right to work state-- and the democrat mayor did nothing about it. He should have told them that anyone who strikes will be fired and replaced with non-union bus drivers, and then immediately start a training program for non-union bus drivers. He would have been swamped with applicants due to the high unemployment rate. And yes, for a few weeks there would be no bus service while the new drivers were trained. But after that, this would never happen again. We need to get some strong politicians with some back bones who will fire these people and replace them with non-union employees.

[clocker]

As it turns out, McCarthy may have been right all along.
No, he wasn't then nor are you now.
I'm guessing you think Michele Bachmann is a brave truth teller too.

It'd be hilarious to see your reaction should you ever be forced to live in the world for which you so stridently advocate.

[mjmacky]

He doesn't understand the clear concise points I make, what hope is there of him understanding the considerably longer C&P content he posts?

[clocker]

Have you ever read one of those in it's entirety?
Not this singular medical/cancer nonsense but the political ones.

Invariably they begin with some outlandish statement (which 9 will claim to be "thinking about"), followed by twenty paragraphs of increasingly irrelevant and fanciful "proof".
This format is convenient in that it allows posters like 9 to ignore the bulk of the cut/paste text because meaning isn't their raison d'être, they are deployed as alphabetical artillery.
Precision and accuracy matter little when the plan is to carpet bomb the entire conversation.

[999969999]

So? No comments about the cities in California and Pennsylvania going bankrupt due to the outrageous pay and benefits of their union employees.

Do you see the writing on the wall, Comrade Macky?

Eventually, your pay and benefits might get slashed as well.

It's another nail in the coffin of public employee unions. It is just a matter of time before the average American wakes up and sees what your unions have been doing with their tax money.

I hope that at a certain point, the average American will respond the way the citizens of Bell, California did in 2010:

Hundreds of residents of one of the poorest municipalities in Los Angeles County shouted in protest last night as tensions rose over a report that the city’s manager earns an annual salary of almost $800,000.

An overflow crowd packed a City Council meeting in Bell, a mostly Hispanic city of 38,000 about 10 miles (16 kilometers) southeast of Los Angeles, to call for the resignation of Mayor Oscar Hernandez and other city officials. Residents left standing outside the chamber banged on the doors and shouted “fuera,” or “get out” in Spanish.

It was the first council meeting since the Los Angeles Times reported July 15 that Chief Administrative Officer Robert Rizzo earns $787,637 -- with annual 12 percent raises -- and that Bell pays its police chief $457,000, more than Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck makes in a city of 3.8 million people. Bell council members earn almost $100,000 for part-time work.

City Attorney Edward Lee said the council members couldn’t discuss salaries in public without advance notice. The council then adjourned for a private session. About an hour later, the council members returned, and Hernandez read a statement saying the city would prepare a report on the salaries and seek public comment at the next council meeting, scheduled for Aug. 16.

Residents shouted in protest. Lee said he would have the room cleared if people continued to speak out of line. Police Chief Randy Adams said the fire department wanted to end the meeting because the crowd outside was blocking the door.
Easing Tensions

Then, in what appeared to be an effort to ease tensions, Hernandez announced that the meeting to discuss salaries would be held instead on July 26.

After the meeting, Bell resident Ali Saleh read a statement from a newly formed group called the Bell Association to Stop the Abuse. He called for an independent audit of city salaries and contracts.

On July 1 Bell took control of many of the city functions of neighboring Maywood, a city whose council members voted to contract out almost all services. Saleh also asked that Bell stop that process until the city’s salary investigations were resolved.

Bell has sold two general obligation bond issues totaling $50 million in the past six years, according to prospectuses for the bonds and information in the city’s annual financial statement for 2009. In that time, its debt has risen to $1,972 per capita in 2009 from $599 in 2004, according to its annual financial statement.
Inquiry Under Way

The city’s personal income was $24,800 per capita in 2008, according to its financial statement. That compares with an average of $32,819 nationwide, according to 2010 figures from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis.

Bell’s general fund revenue declined 4.6 percent to $14.1 million for the fiscal year that ended June 30, 2009, according to the city’s financial statement. The city’s expenses rose 2.3 percent to $15.9 million in same period.

The Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office has begun an inquiry into Bell council member pay, according to Dave Demerjian, head of the office’s Public Integrity Division. He said Bell council members were receiving $8,083 a month, mostly by serving on city-related commissions.

“We’re reviewing the council member salaries to see if they conform to state law,” Demerjian said in a telephone interview.

California law limits the salaries of council members to several hundred dollars a month, depending on the size of the city, according to Hector De La Torre, a state assemblyman from nearby South Gate, who sponsored legislation in 2005 that limits how much council members can get paid from other city-related assignments to $150 a month.
‘Obscene Pay’

De La Torre said that after his bill was passed, Bell’s City Council voted to operate under its own charter, rather than adhere to state laws on how cities should be run.

“It seems obscene to me,” De La Torre said in a telephone interview. “People making $30,000 a year are paying taxes so that their council members can make $80,000.”

Adams, Bell’s police chief, said in an interview after the council meeting that he had retired as chief of police in the much larger city of Glendale, California, when Bell officials approached him.

“I told them they would have to pay me what I was making in retirement and the $165,000 I would make as chief of police,” Adams said.

Adams said he had been brought in to end corruption in Bell’s police department.

“Some of the former members of this force are in the federal penitentiary,” he said.
‘Streets Are Cleaner’

Hernandez, the mayor, defended the salaries in an interview with the Los Angeles Times.

“Our streets are cleaner, we have lovely parks, better lighting throughout the area, our community is better,” Hernandez said, according to the newspaper. “These things just don’t happen, they happen because he had a vision and made it happen.”

Carmen Avalos, the city clerk in South Gate, said she attended the Bell council meeting to help educate people about the political process.

“This is what we are trying to avoid,” she said in an interview at the meeting. “The lack of fiduciary responsibility, the lack of transparency.”

[999969999]

But earlier you mentioned Sweden as a shining example of a socialist country with a high standard of living. I've been there with my family on several trips. While it is a nice place to visit, I was so happy to get back home after the vacation was over. I would not want to live there.
I hear a sigh of relief so audible it crossed the Atlantic. Sweden thanks you.

Let's take nearby Finland as a better example-- one which I am quite familiar with. I have relatives living in Lapland and Helsinki, and have visited them a number of times over the years. The ones in Helsinki have a 3 bedroom, 2 bathroom home, similar to what we would call a "town house" and they are so proud of it. I love them dearly, and I am happy for them, but their place is tiny. We have 7 bedrooms and 4 bathrooms in our Eagar home (and my grandparents' home in Eugene, Oregon is even bigger!). And here's the other thing... they only have one tiny car! And they hardly ever use it! They use mainly public transportation to get around in the city. Almost every time they took me anywhere, we had to use public transportation and it was okay, but not nearly as nice as riding in a car and getting to your destination quickly. It took forever to get anywhere!

So no, I don't think they have as high of a standard of living as we do. I wouldn't want to live like that. Once again, nice place to visit, and I had a lot of fun with my cousins, etc., but I was so happy to get back home.
You conflate ostentatious consumerism with a high standard of living.
How many people live in your seven bedroom McMansion?
In your grandparents Versailles?

And gee, how stupid of the Finns to not be beholden to oil cartels by building and using public transportation.
They probably all secretly lust after Escalades, it's their damned socialist governments thwarting them.

I agree with you on that part. That is a good point, and I wish we were more like them in that respect. But our way of doing that is through more drilling here, using our oil, natural gas, coal, and building more nuclear power plants.

As for ostentatious consumerism... isn't that the whole point of working? So, you can spend it and enjoy it?

[clocker]

Your solutions to our energy dependencies are all fraught with major downsides.
"Our oil" is of unknown quantity and at least a decade in the future.
"Our natural gas" will be extracted primarily with processes that require massive amounts of water and you have heard that a large part of our natural gas reserves are in bone dry major drought areas.
Coal is a filthy way to generate power.
I'm not completely averse to nuclear generating but it would have to be preceded by a significant infrastructure upgrade.
Issues like disposal, transport, and grid rebuild get decided before the ideas for plants are accepted.


As for ostentatious consumerism... isn't that the whole point of working? So, you can spend it and enjoy it?
Perhaps for you it is.
You don't seem to allow for the possibility that something different from your comfort zone is not automatically inferior or the worst possible alternative.
Don't you imagine that should your Finnish relatives ever visit Eagar, they'd be as disoriented as you were?
Maybe go home and make snarky comments to the reindeer?

[999969999]

Your solutions to our energy dependencies are all fraught with major downsides.
"Our oil" is of unknown quantity and at least a decade in the future.
"Our natural gas" will be extracted primarily with processes that require massive amounts of water and you have heard that a large part of our natural gas reserves are in bone dry major drought areas.
Coal is a filthy way to generate power.
I'm not completely averse to nuclear generating but it would have to be preceded by a significant infrastructure upgrade.
Issues like disposal, transport, and grid rebuild get decided before the ideas for plants are accepted.

I'm glad to see you are at least open to the idea of building some more generating stations. At least you are reasonable.
It will take over a decade to get them built. Why not start building them now, and take care of the disposal, transport, and grid rebuild issues while we are building the new nuclear generating plants?


As for ostentatious consumerism... isn't that the whole point of working? So, you can spend it and enjoy it?
Perhaps for you it is.
You don't seem to allow for the possibility that something different from your comfort zone is not automatically inferior or the worst possible alternative.
Don't you imagine that should your Finnish relatives ever visit Eagar, they'd be as disoriented as you were?
Maybe go home and make snarky comments to the reindeer? LOL! I LOVE THIS!!! THANKS FOR PROVIDING MY CHUCKLE OF THE DAY!!! They have been to Eugene, but not Eagar yet. They like Eugene, but then, who wouldn't like it? It is a wonderful place. Eagar, on the other hand, is an acquired taste. I think most people would be hopelessly bored with it.



...

[clocker]

It will take over a decade to get them built. Why not start building them now, and take care of the disposal, transport, and grid rebuild issues while we are building the new nuclear generating plants?
Because that's what we did fifty years ago and none of those issues have yet been addressed.
The "Build it now and we'll figure out the rest later" mindset is actually code for "Build it now,we'll ignore the consequences later" which is why the US is littered with improperly stored nuclear waste material that no one wants to acknowledge or deal with.