Comments on: Nanotech Breathalyzer Detects Telltale Signs of Lung Cancer

By: website

website — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 18:27:17 +0000

Police: Good news sir I wont be arresting you for drink driving. The bad news is you have cancer. Have a safe night.
Man: …..

By: Chase Daniels

Chase Daniels — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 14:09:06 +0000

For some reason that picture really, really turns me on.

By: John Stosel

John Stosel — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 12:11:36 +0000

Oh wow, that is like WAY cool dude. Well done!

RT
http://www.anonymous-web.be.tc

By: Steve

Steve — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 10:19:04 +0000

Pretty impressive figuring out that cancer cells emit distinct chemicals in our breath. I guess those reports of some dogs being trained to sniff out cancer are actually plausible.

By: Grace

Grace — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 00:24:09 +0000

I think that this is rather interesting. This new device will certainly help discover lung cancer in the more curable early stages, but I’m afraid that I’m not even 16 yet and am having trouble with some of the words and phrases. I’m not saying that you should dumb it down or anything, it’s just a comment. Ignore it if you will. I’m a bit unsure as to how the gold nanoparticles work. Are they actually inhaled? What if someone developed an inability to actually have the nanoparticles near or in their mouth? What do nanoparticles contain? Or are they just random particles? Are they sensors or something more organic? Do they occur naturally? Is this product released for use in the US or is this just a report of going-ons in Israel that could not aid us in anyway unless the patient flew there? (which I’m pretty sure is not included on US citizen’s heath insurance policy) I’m just curious as to what the finer details of this invention are.

By: badnicolez

badnicolez — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 22:40:09 +0000

That first sentence should be changed, but only because many people who get lung cancer are not smokers, or have never smoked.

If this test can be made inexpensively enough, it should be done during annual screenings for everybody say, over the age of thirty, much like a lipid profile is now.

By: Art

Art — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 19:47:15 +0000

If it’s such a financial burden for them to smoke, they should probably quit, smoke less, or smoke cheepos.

By: robot makes music

robot makes music — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 17:50:50 +0000

This is a pretty hot invention, but I think you made a factual error in the first like of the article, to wit: “part of a smoker’s routine checkup.”

Let’s not go assuming that the average smoker visits a doctor, let alone can afford it with the huge amount of their budget the government has made their addiction. To pay for smoking related ills, the tax on tobacco keeps going up, keeps taking away more money the addicts could use for something like medical care, assuming they go in the first place. A lot of smokers I know/knew weren’t all that keen on visiting the doc. Some of them are “knew” because they died of smoking related diseases.