Hoax or child prodigy?

Well you would have thought.... so he's either being very selfish and irresponsible by not sharing or its a load of cack. Which one is your money on?

what i think he is trying to say is that you will never be able to "cure" everything, there willl always be killers as they evolve. Witness most STDs (eg syphillis), due to overtreatment with penicillin in Cambodia during the Vietnam War, by the American Army, there are penicillin resistant strains.

He was trying to say that there will always be things outside of our control that will kill us.

I suppose its a possibility that someone has a purported cure and is selling info to the highest bidder, is that what you mean?

I suppose its a possibility that someone has a purported cure and is selling info to the highest bidder, is that what you mean?

I had found a technique to treat cancer and Aids genetically," Jaswal said.

Taken from ananova.com:

Indian boy, 11, says he can treat Aids and cancer

An 11-year-old Indian village boy, with an IQ of 162, claims to have treated people suffering from cancer and Aids.

Akrit Jaswal's IQ level is said to be higher than that of Albert Einstein.

Akrit, from the village of Noorpur has been helping research fellows at the Tata Cancer Research Institute in Mumbai for two months.

"There were moments when nearly 300 patients, including doctors, would be lined up to see me. I had found a technique to treat cancer and Aids genetically," Jaswal said.

He won't say what exactly he does to treat patients.

B R Rahi, chairman of the Himachal Pradesh School Education Board says: "The Gifted Development Centre in the US has confirmed Akrit's genius. We are treating this as a special case due to his extraordinary abilities."

Local newspaper reports say Jaswal's parents sold most of their property to finance foreign trips for their son. The money has also helped to establish a research laboratory in New Delhi.

Jaswal himself added: "I would like to do a doctorate in pharmaceutical chemistry and continue with my research."

Well you would have thought.... so he's either being very selfish and irresponsible by not sharing or its a load of cack. Which one is your money on?

Treating cancer genetically???

OK then...

Unless he knows one heck of a special prodecure that the medical world do not yet currently know, it is currently impossible if not illegal to do what he purposes.

Patents cover this aspect very nicely. Drug companies will pay a lot of money for this kind of information.

what i think he is trying to say is that you will never be able to "cure" everything, there willl always be killers as they evolve. Witness most STDs (eg syphillis), due to overtreatment with penicillin in Cambodia during the Vietnam War, by the American Army, there are penicillin resistant strains.

He was trying to say that there will always be things outside of our control that will kill us.

Those are the words of a quitter. We can kill bacteria, we will conquer viruses in the future. I'm real optimistic about this particular topic and as far as optimism goes, I curse existence whenever I wake up in the morning and have work/ school.

Right.........

I agree everyone has to die of something, but what happened to things like... TB that used to kill loads of people but is now (if it is treated properly and patient does not have conjunction with something liek HIV/AIDS) for the most part completely curable?

and what about people who have cancer and DO get cured of it, which happens now?!?!

You do talk al ot of garbage I must say.

Rosie

Actually bacteria are resistant to the majority of antibiotics and in actual fact the world's most powerful anitbiotic does not kill some bacteria. It seems unlikely that we will conquer viruses..

I don't talk a lot of garbage, thank you! A lot of diseases have been cured due to improved living conditions and hygiene. The supposed wonder drugs antibiotics are now not being readily perscribed because the medical profession realise that the majority of them are not able to kill bacteria and handing them out with just cause the bacteria to become resistant to all antibiotics.

Well of course not all antibiotics kill all bacteria, so even the "most powerful" antibiotic is unlikely to work against every single bacterium in existence. What exactly do you mean by "bacteria are resistant to the majority of antibiotics"?

I venture to disagree.

Diseases are not CURED, in general, by improved living conditions or hygiene. These measures may help to PREVENT people from getting a particular disease, but for the most part once a person has TB or a similar disease, improving their living conditions will not make them spontanously "cured".

I don't REALLY see what your fascination with antibiotics is (are you just focusing on this because you realised you were getting nowhere with cancer?). However, the reduced prescription of antibiotics is primarily a reduction in their INAPPROPRIATE prescription, i.e. for viral illnesses and similar conditions against which antibiotics are not helpful. It is not because "the majority of them are not able to kill bacteria". If they couldn't kill bacteria, they wouldn't be antibiotics.

In simple terms, the majory antibiotics are not able to destroy bacteria.

The medical profession only weapon against disease is antibiotics. That is why cancer and aids will never be cureed.

Here is a quote from a book: "This is an increasing problem and is caused by a mutation in the bacteria which confers resistance to penicillin. Consequently non-resistant bacteria are not killed off leaving the field free for the resistant ones to reproduce passing on their resistance. This is why Doctors are reluctant to prescribe antibiotics when the patient can do without them."

60% of antibiotics don't have any effects on any bacteria?

That would be about right

I don't understand what you mean "Are you just messing around now?" Surely if I went to the trouble of quoting from a book how am I messing around.