In theory, any broken cell or damaged cell can be cured with the use of stem cells. Knew limbs can be created but they do not know a structure.
No, but someone with Lyme Disease might be. It depends on how life threatening it is
A disease that you can transfer to your child by the DNA that you give.It is a disease that is encoded into your DNA and some of your old family members may show it or some of your kids might show it too.
you could get raibees if your bitten by a dog with that disease
In many cases, a doctor shouldn't give you medication for a viral disease because the medications are not effective in treating viral diseases. Giving out antibiotics or other medications that are not effective against the disease you have contributes to antibiotic resistence and failure of treatment.
Where might this article most likely be found
"Virgilio" is not the name of any disease. You might want to check the word you mean and try again.
Well, it's sort of like this: WHen you have a disease you are very likely to feel ill. And when you feel ill, you probably have an illness and that means you might have a disease.
If it is a female, it might be about to give birth, but it might also have a disease. If it is a male it probably has a disease, or if a young male ( fry or getting color) it might be deformed.
The AP has reported that an American man with AIDS appears to have been cured of the disease after receiving a marrow transplant normally used to fight leukemia. Doctors and researchers are cautioning that it might be a fluke.
The word "incurable" is a form of surrender used by someone who has not yet discovered, or perhaps assembled, the research to show that a disease can be brought into remission. Diseases can look incurable for a long time, not because we haven't found a method, but because there are alternate movations for groups to use the word. Someone who has a disease that is "incurable" but then gets cured runs into a dilemma. That person is competing with all of the authoirty from sources that cited the disease could not be cured. No longer could they have had this disease from which they were cured because society will no longer let them have the illness. Someone might state, "If the disease is incurable you never had the illness in the first place, it must have been something else." This person loses their authoirty that they have had an illness because they have been cured or even worse, abandons treatement just because a critical perspective makes a positive outcome look impossible. Whats worse is that the culture looses the ability to document what brought it into remission. For most diseases, treatment requires more than just taking your pills. If you lose that positive vision that the disease can be cured, that attitude itself can influence behaviors that promote recovery. To call any disease "incurable" is unethcial no matter how far away technology is away from actually curing the disease. Why? Calling the disease incurable influences that surrender and the discoveres required to cure the illness.
By watching the series "The Following", it looks like he might have Hyperthyroidism. Because of his weight (Low). And his right eye being slightly bigger than his left eye (that is called: exophthalmos). It is treatable with medicine, and permanently cured with surgery.
Tay- Sachs disease is inherited through offspring. If one of the parents are a carrier the one of the children might get it.
A cause of communicable disease might include exposure to an infected person or animal. An effect of a communicable disease might include death or disability.
The Trojan War might not have happened had not Telephus gone to Greece to get his wound cured.
(I am the author of the question) I am writing a novel in which a disease created as a bioweapon gets into the population. The disease has a week or so incubation period where it is highly infectious before symptoms start to show. Symptoms include interal hemorrhaging, a weakening of the immune system, amemia, chills and loss of appetite, among other things. The society that this breaks out in is a post-apocalytic city-state. They lack a lot of technology, but also have some high technology stuff left over from before the collapse. While the disease in incurable with what they have available, I was wondering if there would be some possible way for them to sterilize it in the infected to keep it from spreading any more, but in a way where those who are ill remain sick and are not cured of the disease.
The decline of the Olmec civilization around 400 BCE is believed to be due to factors such as climate change, environmental degradation, and possibly internal conflict. The decline of the Zapotec civilization around 900 CE can be attributed to a combination of reasons including environmental factors, internal unrest, and possibly invasion by neighboring groups.
Although there are rare cases of infection or scarring, the major risk is that the grafted area might not look the way the patient expected it to look.