ArticlesBlog

How nanoparticles could change the way we treat cancer | Joy Wolfram

How nanoparticles could change the way we treat cancer | Joy Wolfram


It was a Sunday afternoon
back in April of this year. My phone was ringing, I picked it up. The voice said, “It’s Rebecca. I’m just calling to invite you to my funeral.” I said, “Rebecca,
what are you talking about?” She said, “Joy, as my friend,
you have to let me go. It’s my time.” The next day, she was dead. Rebecca was 31 years old when she died. She had an eight-year struggle
with breast cancer. It came back three times. I failed her. The scientific community failed her. And the medical community failed her. And she’s not the only one. Every five seconds, someone dies of cancer. Today, we medical
researchers are committed to having Rebecca and people like her be one of the last patients that we fail. The US government alone has spent
over 100 billion on cancer research since the 1970s, with limited progress
in regards to patient survival, especially for certain types
of very aggressive cancers. So we need a change because, clearly, what we’ve been doing so far
has not been working. And what we do in medicine
is to send out firefighters, because cancer is like a big fire. And these firefighters
are the cancer drugs. But we’re sending them out
without a fire truck — so without transportation, without ladders and without emergency equipment. And over 99 percent of these firefighters
never make it to the fire. Over 99 percent of cancer drugs
never make it to the tumor because they lack transportation and tools to take them to the location
they’re aiming for. Turns out, it really is all about
location, location, location. (Laughter) So we need a fire truck
to get to the right location. And I’m here to tell you
that nanoparticles are the fire trucks. We can load cancer drugs
inside nanoparticles, and nanoparticles
can function as the carrier and necessary equipment to bring the cancer drugs
to the heart of the tumor. So what are nanoparticles, and what does it really mean
to be nano-sized? Well, there are many different
types of nanoparticles made out of various materials, such as metal-based nanoparticles or fat-based nanoparticles. But to really illustrate
what it means to be nano-sized, I took one of my hair strands and placed it under the microscope. Now, I have very thin hair, so my hair is approximately
40,000 nanometers in diameter. So this means, if we take
400 of our nanoparticles and we stack them on top of each other, we get the thickness
of a single hair strand. I lead a nanoparticle laboratory
to fight cancer and other diseases at Mayo Clinic here in Jacksonville. And at Mayo Clinic, we really have the tools
to make a difference for patients, thanks to the generous donations
and grants to fund our research. And so, how do these nanoparticles
manage to transport cancer drugs to the tumor? Well, they have an extensive toolbox. Cancer drugs without nanoparticles
are quickly washed out of the body through the kidneys because they’re so small. So it’s like water going through a sieve. And so they don’t really have time
to reach the tumor. Here we see an illustration of this. We have the firefighters,
the cancer drugs. They’re circulating in the blood, but they’re quickly
washed out of the body and they don’t really end up
inside the tumor. But if we put these cancer drugs
inside nanoparticles, they will not get washed out by the body because the nanoparticles are too big. And they will continue
to circulate in the blood, giving them more time to find the tumor. And here we see the cancer drug,
the firefighters, inside the fire truck, the nanoparticles. They’re circulating in the blood, they don’t get washed out and they actually end up
reaching the tumor. And so what other tools
do nanoparticles have? Well, they can protect cancer drugs
from getting destroyed inside the body. There are certain very important
but sensitive drugs that are easily degraded
by enzymes in the blood. So unless they have
this nanoparticle protection, they will not be able to function. Another nanoparticle tool
are these surface extensions that are like tiny hands with fingers
that grab on to the tumor and fit exactly onto it, so that when the nanoparticles
are circulating, they can attach onto the cancer cells, buying the cancer drugs
more time to do their job. And these are just some of the many tools
that nanoparticles can have. And today, we have more than 10 clinically approved
nanoparticles for cancer that are given to patients
all over the world. Yet, we have patients,
like Rebecca, who die. So what are the major
challenges and limitations with currently approved nanoparticles? Well, a major challenge is the liver, because the liver is the body’s
filtration system, and the liver recognizes
and destroys foreign objects, such as viruses, bacteria
and also nanoparticles. And the immune cells in the liver
eat the nanoparticles, preventing them from reaching the tumor. And here we see an illustration
where the kidney is no longer a problem, but these fire trucks, the nanoparticles, get stuck in the liver and, actually, less of them
end up reaching the tumor. So a future strategy
to improve nanoparticles is to temporarily disarm
the immune cells in the liver. So how do we disarm these cells? Well, we looked at drugs
that were already clinically approved for other indications to see if any of them
could stop the immune cells from eating the nanoparticles. And unexpectedly,
in one of our preclinical studies, we found that a 70-year-old malaria drug was able to stop the immune cells
from internalizing the nanoparticles so that they could escape the liver and continue their journey
to their goal, the tumor. And here we see the illustration
of blocking the liver. The nanoparticles don’t go there, and they instead end up in the tumor. So, sometimes, unexpected connections
are made in science that lead to new solutions. Another strategy
for preventing nanoparticles from getting stuck in the liver is to use the body’s own nanoparticles. Yes — surprise, surprise. You, and you and you, and all of us
have a lot of nanoparticles circulating in our bodies. And because they’re part of our bodies, the liver is less likely
to label them as foreign. And these biological nanoparticles
can be found in the saliva, in the blood, in the urine,
in pancreatic juice. And we can collect them from the body and use them as fire trucks
for cancer drugs. And in this case, the immune cells in the liver
are less likely to eat the biological nanoparticles. So we’re using
a Trojan-horse-based concept to fool the liver. And here we see
the biological nanoparticles circulating in the blood. They don’t get recognized by the liver, and they end up in the tumor. And in the future, we want to exploit
nature’s own nanoparticles for cancer drug delivery, to reduce side effects and save lives by preventing the cancer drugs
from being in the wrong location. However, a major problem has been: How do we isolate these biological
nanoparticles in large quantities without damaging them? My lab has developed
an efficient method for doing this. We can process large quantities
of liquids from the body to produce a highly concentrated,
high-quality formulation of biological nanoparticles. And these nanoparticles
are not yet in clinical use, because it takes an average of 12 years to get something from the lab to your medicine cabinet. And this is the type of challenge
that requires teamwork from scientists and physicians, who dedicate their lives to this battle. And we keep going,
thanks to inspiration from patients. And I believe that if we keep working
on these nanomedicines, we will be able to reduce harm
to healthy organs, improve quality of life and save future patients. I like to imagine that if these treatments
had been available for Rebecca, that call from her could have been an invitation not to her funeral, but her wedding. Thank you. (Applause)

Comments (85)

  1. Finally, a topic on medicinal drug use

  2. Incredible stuff..

  3. Praise the SCIENCE. !

  4. Reebaca drama was my plan for my talk on cancer treatment that I day dream every day of giving tedx talks but she took my drama but I also don't have the magic drug

  5. Finally some is talking about this

  6. My immediate thought is what are the drawbacks and how do we ensure no lasting harm comes from the nanoparticles?

    On the other hand, if it avoids their death, it should be worth it.

  7. It also changes the way we GET cancer! 🥀

  8. Cannabis for the win!!!

  9. أرجو ترجمة الفيديو إلى اللغة العربية

  10. Nano particles are also in food now (major brands I won't name.) These particles are entering the body and wreaking havoc, all without our knowledge or consent. They also get "turned on" by outside forces (think governments) when "they" want "the masses" (us) to behave in a certain way. We are, effectively, being turned into "artificial intelligence" beings, to do the bidding of the elite. I believe this is part of the reason for all the shootings in the US. We are being controlled. Good luck, everyone.

  11. Sorry for you're loss..Thats is extraordinary..Ted is so enlightening and educating keep feeding me please..🙏..

  12. Already in chemtrails since the 60’s so how bout we reprogram the ones already in everybody…..

  13. A worthy TED lecture.

  14. Her last name is an element. Wonder how many Americans would know which…

  15. My fiancé was just diagnosed with stage 4 colon cancer. She is only 30 years old and is an audiologist, has been otherwise extremely healthy, and is eligible for any experimental treatment… unfortunately the doctors have told us there is no cure and she will be on chemo the rest of her life. I call BS on all this talk of new medical breakthroughs when obviously nothing is really being done. It’s all just people talking about things they can’t do

  16. How about we eat right

  17. My fiancé was just diagnosed with stage 4 colon cancer. She is only 30 years old and is an audiologist, has been otherwise extremely healthy, and is eligible for any experimental treatment… unfortunately the doctors have told us there is no cure and she will be on chemo the rest of her life. I call BS on all this talk of new medical breakthroughs when obviously nothing is really being done. It’s all just people talking about things they can’t do

  18. Holy crap, TED hosted an actual scientific/medical talk

  19. I fully fathom that $100 billion is a ton of money, but we've been spending 6.6 times that annually on the military which makes seem as though it's not that much of a priority.

  20. How about changing to the Gerson therapy!

  21. Yes yes yes "Nano" and "Quantum" we might as well have said "Magic" We have heard for 30 years now how whenever we figure out the nano-stuff or quantum computers, then were all saved.

  22. She's from Northern Florida? She dont even have a Southern accent!

    Yes, I am being facetious 🙂

  23. Somehow, somewhat intuitively, I've always thought of cancer causes as being related to synthetic nanoparticles … likely plastics and/or other toxic, inorganic chemistries synthesized without proper consideration of how life might manage these creations. 🤔
    So, I think of cancers as the result of our body freaking out, and growing crazy, because they can't figure out WTF to do with all these synthesized nanoparticulates slowly saturating our bodies.

  24. Why am I seeing quack healer adverts on a TED talk…?😒😠

  25. See other ways nanotech is being used. There are many sides to this story. https://youtu.be/boBdrbODm3s

    https://www.targeted2free.com/about-sister-keri-burnor

  26. Nanomachines, son.

  27. But, didn’t a doctor in the EIGHTIES already come up with a treatment for cancer that doesn’t involve killing ALL your cells?? 🤔

  28. I'll beleive it when I see it, big pharma makes way to much money off people getting cancer.

  29. TED actually hosting a vid about science again? That's why I subbed months ago, but never got since.

  30. A lot of chat online about using sound frequencies to stop most diseases recently. Another is hope with the new Quantum compter. View YouTube The Truth About Cancer Series, Free Eastern Medicine webinar out now.

  31. I am moved. ❤️

  32. For a long time is the cancer treatment is well known. But it is cheap and that is the reason why the pharma industry doesn't want to use it! Killing people and take money for it – this is the business of the medicine today!

  33. How about we switch from treating cancer to Curing cancer just a thought

  34. The only cure for cancer is checking your engine once a while, I mean about 3 times a year, that way you’ll at least won’t be late to treat it before reaching to the terminal

  35. Why do i get the feeling Joy made up the story at the start🤔 …sounds like one of those reel in the crowd with a softener and then hit them with the product ur trying to sell.

  36. Good for cancer, but what about the evil scientists thinking of using it for more sinister means of control. 🙂

  37. Nice video.
    I am from india and i really likes your videos.

  38. When this woman use Plasma Science shared by the Keshe Foundation, it will be easier for her to solve cancer or any conditions using only water of CO2 GANS. There is not a need to insert any nano particles inside the body when you really understood how one should interact with a living body, all you need is the energy for the body to use to get rid of cancer and accelerate healing. Healing process can be done in minutes or in 60 days depending how you wanted it to go. In the end cancer is easy to handle and stop it from harming the body. Even viruses are easy to handle where most medical practitioners does not have any solution at all. Let's hope people working on helping people will focus more on better ways and not on the funding they received from doing their work. Technology is already out there for free, all you need to do is use it.

  39. Do you think you can really do it because I watched it 8 times the smashing and blasting I'll tell you right now if you do not get rid of the pink and gold it will happen again and again and again the new cannot mask it you really have to smash them into fine particles I'm sorry and God forgive me but that is the truth and now we must decide who is humanized! and who is de-humanzed! God have mercy DO YOU THINK YOU CAN HOLD IT BACK THIS TIME?? If you must get with blue and introduce the green what do you think's going to eventually HAPPENE if you want me to show you the decisive element just ask me!
    "💛🗡️" ¥ (?) Do you want me to do it!!👽💙 Are you truly prepared to do it for the better of all

  40. Finally the Cancer have some Answer!

  41. My father died from the liver cancer 1 year ago. I miss him so much and i am sorry for your loss.

  42. Would that old drug be Quinine?

  43. What is the name of that biological nanoparticles found in human body?

  44. What is this lady’s accent? I cannot place it.
    But what I do know is that she is doing God’s work. And that humanity will be better off having Joy in our force.

  45. ‘Treat cancer’? Why would anyone other than the corporations who manufacture ‘treatments’ be interested in this bullshit? After umpteen years of research and development the best pharmaceutical snake oil salesmen can come up with is another ‘treatment’. What about some ‘cures’? Or aren’t ‘cures’ what R&D are looking for? Cancer is a massive business, if cures were available and they are, would it not benefit ‘treatment’ producing corporations to suppress them with legislation? Which must be the purpose of the 1939 Cancer Act.

    So government and treatment manufacturers colluded 80 years ago to outlaw and criminalise anyone looking for ‘cures’ and to fund research into ‘treatments’. With funding supplied by fraudulent cancer charities. Who subtly con the public to donate because they think the charities are funding research that is ultimately looking for ‘cures’. If the public understood what was going on they wouldn’t give a penny. I’m betting 90% have no idea there is a Cancer Act. I’m also betting over 50% of the 10% who do know don’t really understand the implications. Because naively they believe the transparent bullshit establishment propaganda explanation justifying this draconian ‘cure’ suppressing legislation. So it’s not much of a surprise that incidents of Cancer have over the last 80 years been steadily rising. Cancer is a manufactured disease, nothing is more obvious.

  46. Her passion is inspiring

  47. I think using the Host nano particles is the way to go ie tailor made treatments pre market clinical trials will fast track the 12 year wait by the FDA,Thank you for a very interesting video,Djerassi.

  48. there will never be a cure. cures do not make profit $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

  49. Therein lies a major assumption that a funeral is worse than a wedding.

  50. 1:31 I think that’s a bit of a exaggeration. treatment and medicine for cancer is a lot better than it used to be. For most of human history up until 30 years ago almost any kind of cancer was pretty much a death sentence and you were dead within 6 months to a year. Today There’s a lot of cancers if you catch early enough you can live beyond 5 years to 10 years like prostrate, Hodgkin’s lymphoma, thyroid, throat cancer. Robert De Niro, micheal c hall, Elton John, Ronnie Wood and Ben stiller and many more people who we all know have had cancer beat it. If they had gotten it a couple decades ago they would of been dead in a year. Obviously we still have a long way to go in terms of treating and curing cancer and doctors need to get better at treating it because a lot of people do die from cancer still but it is better than it used to be. I do agree we haven’t made really any progress at treating really aggressive cancers like brain, liver or pancreatic cancer. Those cancers are basically a death sentence. But hopefully that won’t be the case soon.

  51. This is so stupid, they are going through all these hoops to create this amazing science, when we've been able to cure cancer with massive doses of vitamin C. We have known this for decades, but have chosen to bury it in favor of bilking cancer patients of billions with chemo treatments

  52. Nanoparticles? How about using mesenchymal stem cells to transport viruses attacking cancer stem cells instead of using nanoparticles? What are the benefits of nanoparticles? I mean MSC's can even locate cancer cells by their surface markers.

  53. I still cant believe it but my father has cancer

  54. Would someone like to talk with me, i feel lonely and i am not doing great in life.
    Also i lost my father in 2017 with cancer

  55. Wow, every five seconds someone dies of

  56. GCMAF is a cure for cancer by everything I have read. Where is science with this discovery? At least in the UK and France it is being suppressed by laws and regulatory agencies because chemotherapy makes too much money to go away to natural alternatives. Wake me up when cancer scientists get on this and force the world to become aware of it. Wake me up when that happens. Till then, I remain sceptical as to the genuine things science cares about, because it sure seems like money is the priority, not health.

  57. nanoparticles? are you saying that now we can create Gundam 00?

  58. Our genes are super defective. Untill we find out how to repair our damaged genes, cancer will still take so many lives.

  59. Prevention is better than cure, it is about time the "food"-industry is exposed to their cancer fueling processed products that cause cancer. Besides chemo therapy, energy healing and other thousands-of-years-old practices are to be promoted once again.

  60. And they end up in tumor

  61. TED, more of science vids like this one, please.

  62. You need to learn "neslican tay"s life.

  63. "How X COULD treat cancer" is the name of countless TED talks over the years, almost none of which have actually provided any real breakthrough or benefit to any actual cancer patients. This industry is rife with ideas, but barren of anything other than "more surgery, more drugs that may not work" in implementation. I applaud the work being done, but am not at all optimistic that any of this will do anything for an actual cancer patient within the next 20 years.

  64. There has already been a talk about using body's own immune system to destroy cancer.

  65. Love this 💜💜💜

  66. Since the 80s food companys have used nano particles.Artificial intelligent pieces come together in the body to form machinery and beacons that can be traced from satellites and activated or have programing built in.Fermented chloridal algi removes metals from your body.First use charcoal tabs for 5 to 7 days wait 2 days then start taking the algi.Diatamatious earth excelent follow up.

  67. BUT do they take Glock mags?

  68. Search Louise Hay, she cured her own cancer with no drugs but pure energy. Joy didn't fail, just proves science and medicine can reach a certain limit.

  69. The importance of this subject isn't lost on me but I must say, she's ridiculously attractive.

  70. This method still doesn't solve the main problem of current chemotherapy, which is the problem of cancer drugs destroying both healthy and cancer cells. Circulating the drugs in the body for a longer time also means they will cause more damage to healthy cells. Nanoparticles could be part of the solution, yes, if paired with some kind of a mechanism which directs them to the tumor and cancer cells.

  71. How about bacterial resistance. They say it's going to cause more deaths than cancer soon. But pharmaceutical industry don't care because the profit is not so high…

  72. she's 13 from House MD, isn't she

  73. I am so sorry for your friend. She’s so young. Thanks for your research on nanoparticles to fight cancer. We need your help.

  74. The host is really hot.

  75. It's amazing how this step-by-step child raising method work. https://www.dazwhy.com

  76. The US has spent $100 billion in the war on cancer since the 70's…
    That's why we haven't found cures. It's an industry.

Comment here