Scientists discover an RNA that repairs DNA damage
15 comments
·March 9, 2025tombert
bluGill
We have cured a lot of cancer. There is a lot left we cannot cure. Many of our cures are barely better than death.
starchild3001
We've cured cancer in mice many times, but in humans the disease often comes back despite some extremely targeted and successful therapies. I'm sure more is in the works and thanks to tools like alpha-fold quantum leaps in cancer treatment can be expected every 5-10 yrs.
drowsspa
Quantum leaps are what we already have: tiny and oscillating all over the place
tombert
I would absolutely love to be wrong, but I've just gotten my hopes too many times and known too many people who have died from cancer.
To be clear, I am very much not blaming the scientists for this. I'm confident that the work that they are doing is very cool and challenging. I blame science reporting for always feeling like every headline has to suggest that every discovery is going to completely change the world.
ocdtrekkie
It's worth noting that semaglutide, which is "completely changing the world" of weight loss was initially heavily researched in the 80s and 90s. Some 40-50 years later... it is as big a deal as papers probably described it at the time.
So if this NEAT1 is a big deal, it might not save our parents, but it might save our kids.
timewizard
Well considering a lot of cancers can be the result of genetics and environment than simply eliminating once is clearly never going to be a full strategy.
starchild3001
The root cause of cancer is aging. Cancer incidence increases exponentially with age, suggesting that cellular breakdown and weakened immune surveillance are the primary drivers. While environmental factors play a role, they are secondary. Consider the extremely low incidence of cancer in individuals under 40.
https://www.cancercenter.com/community/blog/2023/06/cancer-r...
kazinator
Cynical view: anything that can repair DNA damage can go rampant and wreak damage.
dakial1
It potentially could be used to stop ageing no? Isn't it mostly caused by accumulation of cell damage?
pests
Last I remember aging is primarily the telomerase unwinding at the end of each chromosome over time.
woleium
that is what i learned 25 years ago too, but apparently the leading edge of gerontology has moved on, and new theories have emerged
thaumasiotes
That was... never a theory. It can't explain aging, because telomeres are either present or not, but aging is a gradual process. (Telomerase is something entirely different, the enzyme that adds telomeres to the DNA in gametes.)
Telomeres are also unimplicated in progeria ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progeria ), which would be a serious problem if people thought aging was caused by loss of telomeres.
Frederation
Announcers voice, 'No'
This seems cool, and it would be great if this does cool stuff like cure or prevent some forms of cancer, but I've kind of learned to not get my hopes up with medical news.
It's felt like a cure for cancer is "just around the corner" for at least the last ~20 years, and I'm sure that cancer therapy has absolutely improved a lot in the last 20 years, but we're very far from what a lot of science journalism articles have promised us.