What an irresponsible headline. I'm not familiar with the research in question but I've worked on cancer during my PhD and the headline alone is sufficient to d

What an irresponsible headline. I'm not familiar with the research in question but I've worked on cancer during my PhD and the headline alone is sufficient to discredit the article. Every kind of tumor? Really? Because we don't even know all the kinds of tumors that are out there. What we do know, however, is that, to this date, no commonality between _all_ tumors has been identified. The smart money is on the hypothesis that there is no commonality, since many possible combinations of cellular malfunction can lead to tumorgenesis. For instance, I distinctly remember having read a review in Nature a few weeks back about a study of certain brain tumors that can either be caused by mutations of some genes, or alternatively can be caused through a purely epigenetic mechanism. How about that! So given all this, how likely is it that the antibody they created blocks CD47 in cancer cells and only cancer cells but of course all types cancer cells, as the article claims? Why don't journalists think/care about the consequences of tabloidizing cancer? These articles play on the feelings of very desperate people, just to get some asshat a few more click-throughs for the monthly metrics.