comment: >
  
  I still think we really, really need to wait for McConnell and Trump to die before we make huge breakthroughs in medical technology.
  I do not want to be ruled by obscenely rich 300 year olds who have become lizard people in all but appearance.
context: This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 74%. (I'm a bot)
  
  
  Israeli scientists are aiming to produce the world's first preventative drug designed to stop tumors causing secondary cancer, and say the active ingredient has shown more than 90 percent effectiveness in mice.
  The effectiveness rate reported means mice with breast cancer that received the peptide were at least 90% less likely to develop secondary tumors than the control group.
  Previous research shows that 12% of patients with a breast cancer diagnosis go on to develop metastatic disease, for which the five-year survival rate is 26%. Chemotherapy is used to kill as many cancer cells as possible, but it doesn't prevent any cells that get left behind from becoming active.
  
  
  Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: cancer^#1 cells^#2 develop^#3 prevent^#4 tumors^#5 >
  
  TIL mice have boobs >
  
  I mean, they are Mammals. >
  
  I have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me? >
  
  I haven't seen that movie in soooo long. Wonder if I would still find it hilarious so many years later >
  
  Modern science has made laboratory test mice indestructible. >
  
  I for one welcome our new mice overlords. It'll be a nice change of pace. >
  
  A mice change >
  
  I’m actually going to go ahead and say many of them are being used. Most things that are claimed to be “cures for cancer” are usually treatments for a certain type of cancer or a certain behavior of cancer, and so when they get finished and deployed they’re big but it’s not like we cured cancer. For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. >
  
  
  For instance this article is about stopping cancer from metastasizing which would be huge but wouldn’t cure cancer. 
  
  The potential for metastasis is literally what sets apart benign tumors from cancerous ones. >
  
  Can you share a source because I’ve always understood metastatic cancer as cancer that has moved from one area to the body to another, also called stage 4 cancer.
  I would love to read and learn more. >
  
  Metastasis == Spreading
  Yours is just a more specific usage of the word >
  
  The person he replied to didn't say spreading though, he said that 'metastasis' is what separates cancer from (benign) tumors.
  Is that true? Because I am pretty confident it isn't. Because as he says, metastasis is stage 4. >
  
  Metastatic cancer = cancer that has spread 
  Cancerous tumor = a tumor with the potential to spread (metastisize), if it hasn't already
  Benign tumor = a tumor without the potential to spread
  Source = trust me bro I'm paying a lot of money for medical school >
  
  Think of all the mice they will save! >
  
  There's an XKCD comic that sums it up.
  
  When you see a claim that a common drug or vitamin "kills cancer cells in a petri dish," keep in mind: so does a handgun. >
  
  One of my favorite comics of all time.
  I could easily claim “I can cure any disease…so long as you don’t care about the outcome of the patient” >
  
  
  "scientist did note though, that the remaining 10% turned into sociopathic rage-fueled murder-fuckers that wouldnt stop in their murderous rampage until slamed in the head with a hammer" >
  
  
  murder-fuckers
  
  Not dying a virgin, nice. >
  
  "In mice" is very different from "in a petri dish". It has its own caveats (things that work on mice don't always work on people), but that's a different point from what that particular comic is making. >
  
  Napalm will indeed stop cancer from spreading in vivo. >
  
  Every time I see a headline like this I think of fark.com, which still exists TIL.
  The ironic "still no cure for cancer". >
  
  Hooray for the mice. Scientists really need to start working on figuring out human cancer. >
  
  Do you think that scientists aren’t knowledgeable on how to conduct medical research? They aren’t doing this for no reason. >
  
  It seems like nowadays scientists are just trying to cure mouse diseases. >
  
  You're not entirely wrong, the mouse model is very limited; but it's still a very useful stepping stone towards the possibility of human applicable therapies. >
  
  Maybe the scientist mice are working on the human cancer. >
  
  They're too distracted by the Vogons.