TEDMED 2010: Danny Hillis Talks Proteomics For Cancer Treatment (VIDEO)

No doubt genomics and the mapping of the human genome is one of the great triumphs of modern science, supplying remarkable insight into the function and design of the human body and paving the way for personal genetic testing. But can reading cells supply enough insight into human disease -- specifically cancer?

Scientist and inventor Danny Hillis tackled that question at TEDMED 2010, explaining how Proteomics -- the study of proteins -- is a crucial next step in effectively treating cancer.

"What we are doing isn't working right now," said Hillis. "I'm going to say some pretty radical things about how we should think about cancer differently."

The problem with genomics, he explained, is that it's not really a blueprint of the body, but a list of "ingredients," and while those ingredients supply a look into the genetic makeup of a person's predispositions, their ability to help locate the cause of sickness is limited. Hillis explained:

Mostly what you need to know to find out if you're sick is not your predispositions but it's actually what's going on in your body right now ... you need to look at the things that the genes are producing, and what's happening after the genetics. And that's what proteomics is all about.

Proteins are the machines operating the body, and their actions make up the conversation that the body is constantly having, he continued. They are telling cells to grow, and to die. And cancer results when something has gone wrong in the conversation -- when communication breaks down.

Watch Hillis explain how he and his team are using proteomics to discover new pathways in cancer treatment, and why he believes cancer must be thought of as a "verb" instead of a "noun."

WATCH:

Comments

[Halsey]

11:48 PM on 01/25/2011

Just keep big pharma out of the program and I'll dare to have hope for future generations.
As a white/slavic woman who ended up with an aggressive, triple negative breast cancer, that usually attacts Black women I am at a loss at to cause/effect/and why me. Zero family history.
I read new studies of triple=neg; particularly in a newletter from St. John's (John Wayne legacy).
I PRAY my 4cm tumor IS being studied. It was certainly big enough for many tests. This lump literally showed up overnight. No joke. I'm thin with small breasts. One day after a shower, no lump; next day a good 2 inch thing. I truly didn't think Cancer as my last mammogram was "okay".

I hate cancer in all its manifestations. I read that more and more very YOUNG become afflicted.
I am all for better treatment but believe in many, not all, cases, our trashing of the air,water,food supply contribute (or cause) some cancers while a child may still be en utero.
Hormones in milk,cows(aka beef), chickens and again god know what is in our water.
Fix earth and cancer will recede. My gut tells me that.

[Nalini Chilkov]

11:23 PM on 01/25/2011

Yes, patients who get individualized treatment plans have better outcomes and better prognoses.
However, genomics and proteomics is just one piece of treating a complex systemic disease. Researchers are so far away from what it is to be doctor and patient going through the cancer journey. This approach is not new. Looking at genomics and proteomics is already part of cancer care. If we know more we can do a more precise job of choosing and managing this aspect of a patient's care. However, the question remains and the real goal for the patient is "How can I be cancer free? and will I regain my health and quality of life? To achieve these goals we ask not just "What causes disease?" but "What causes health?" If the focus remains only on disease and does not include a long term plan for health, then we have missed the most important piece for the patient.

[merlinspinoza]

05:45 PM on 01/25/2011

proper cell regeneration requires deep deep rest regularyly http://www.globalgoodnews.com/health-news-a.html?art=129591263139367216

[RMankovitz]

04:10 PM on 01/25/2011

This TED presenter appears to be clueless as to the advances being made in the alternative health community. For a prime example, see:

http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/

Stanislaw Burzynski, MD, PhD, developed the antineoplaston treatment for cancer and, in my opinion, has cured more people of cancer than all of the oncologists in this country combined. Never heard of him? Both the FDA and the oncology industry tried to put him out of business, but those of us in the alternative health field came to his defense. Finally, even the FDA had to admit his procedure works, and they are presently running supervised clinical trials.

Unfortunately, you first have to qualify for these trials to get the antineoplaston treatments. In other words, the FDA is using the clinical trial approach to choke off widespread access to this amazing therapy, in some cases insisting that you first go through the horrors of chemo/radiation, which unfortunately lowers chances of success. The rest of the oncologists are ignoring him.

For a video of patients celebrating life at the 30 year anniversary of the clinic, see:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQcXMHe3lVk

For a list of Burzynski's more than 250 peer-reviewed research papers on cancer treatment:

http://www.burzynskiclinic.com/ph/media-corner-publications.html

For research on nature-based illness prevention strategies designed by nature to keep you out of the hospital, see "The Wellness Project."

Roy Mankovitz, Director
http://www.MontecitoWellness.com

[gemzenith]

09:01 PM on 01/25/2011

fanned and faved

[RMankovitz]

10:07 PM on 01/25/2011

Thanks.

A movie was recently released on Burzynski and his tribulations with the FDA and the medical community. It is an eyeopener and a tearjerker. Michael Moore would have been proud. See:

http://www.burzynskimovie.com/

[No death panels]

09:48 PM on 01/25/2011

There is no evidence Burzynski has cured anyone. The FDA never said his procedure works (you made that up)-the FDA banned him from treating patients except in approved clinical trials BECAUSE there was no evidence that his procedure worked. The American Cancer Society reviewed his data and found no evidence "antineoplastons" have any anti-cancer properties: http://www.cancer.org/Treatment/TreatmentsandSideEffects/ComplementaryandAlternativeMedicine/PharmacologicalandBiologicalTreatment/antineoplaston-therapy?sitearea=ETO
Here's a little more about him: http://www.medkb.com/Uwe/Forum.aspx/cancer-prostate/7587/Stanislaw-R-Burzynski-2
His treatments aren't covered by most insurance companies, so patients pay tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars out of pocket at the end of their lives to this fraud.
Until he publishes a positive prospective randomized controlled trial instead of videotaping patient testimonials he will continue to have zero credibility.

[lfontay]

02:49 PM on 01/27/2011

Nice to find another user from the right that has no use for alternative health junk. I am all for lots of peer reviewed, evidence-based, double blind placebo controlled studies before I will even go near it. Keep up the good work.

[Kellybelle22]

04:06 PM on 01/25/2011

This isn't really news to practicing medical professionals. We've known for years about the proteome biomarkers that indicate cancer presence and progression, and we target a number of chemotherapies and treatment protocols according to those biomarkers already. What's going to be revolutionary is the way proteomics, once we have as many of these protein genetics mapped as possible, will shape our earlier diagnosis and staging of cancer. Proteomics will also help us customize chemotherapies more specifically to the types of proteins that are signalling the progression of this disease. Let's hope that translates into many more saved lives.

There's a good overview of proteomics and cancer at this link:
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/detection/proteomics