News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Woman with Immortal Cells by lkrubner on Wednesday December 29, 2010 @11:51AM (#2049262)
Although this article makes for some interesting reading, it is also misleading. This really needs to be re-written:

"Today I found out there was once a woman who had immortal cells."

That is misleading in the extreme. Biologists generally refer to cancer cells as "immortal". Healthy cells will limit their own growth, and one theory is that the length of the telomeres at the end of the chromosomes plays an important role in limiting that growth. Cancer cells use high levels of the enzyme telomerase to regrow their telomeres, and thus the cells become "immortal". I am putting quote marks around the word "immortal" because it is important to be aware of what biologists mean when they use the word. The usage should be carefully qualified.

Anyone with cancer can be said to have "immortal" cells. Of any woman with cancer you could write: "I found out there was once a woman who had immortal cells."

Henrietta Lacks cells are important not because they are unique but because they are ordinary. They are ordinary cancer cells, and therefore they give insight cancer, and to several other disease processes.

Re:Woman with Immortal Cells by djacobs on Wednesday December 29, 2010 @12:30PM (#2049436)
I think the title is a pun.

The cells, as cancer, are immortal. But they will also be immortal for much longer than a typical patient's cancer cells because her particular cells have been commandeered for research.

Re:Woman with Immortal Cells by lkrubner on Wednesday December 29, 2010 @01:38PM (#2049662)
I was complaining about this sentence, which uses the past tense and which sounds like it is about a specific individual:

"Today I found out there was once a woman who had immortal cells."