Cheap ,safe Cancer Cure

Apropos of an argument we were having yesterday, I point out this passage:
The next step is to run clinical trials of DCA in people with cancer. These may have to be funded by charities, universities and governments: pharmaceutical companies are unlikely to pay because they can’t make money on unpatented medicines.
Click to expand...
 
That sounds great! however since it has no patent it will not get off the ground until some drug company modifies it enough to get a patent on it. the drug industry opertates on profit not what people need.
 
untrue. if no one could make mponey on it, it would be made now. you can be sure whoever is making it now is making money on it.

And all the big pharms have to do is take it an make a monor change to the formaula that makes it work better and they then have a patentable drug.

if it REALLY works (proven in other studies to DUPLICATE the results of this study) then you can be you ass the big pharms will do exaclty as I've said.

Cancer cure is worth HUGE profit whether it's patented or not.
 
Hmm if this happens how many hospitals and such will go under. A large portion of our health care industry is geared towards treating cancer not curing it easially and cheaply.
 
HipLew said:
Cancer cure is worth HUGE profit whether it's patented or not.
Click to expand...
Untrue. In fact, that's absurd on its face. The pharmaceutical industry is all about the patents, and nothing else.

You assume that dichloroacetate is being produced commercially now. That is a very shakey assumption. It is probably just compounded as needed since there's no patent.
 
there is another article (i lost it) that lists the manufacture as "various", so it seems there is enough profit in it for others to make it.
 
no. it is used in for cardiac issues; the patent is for the modification of the drug to temper the side effects.
 
Which brings back up my point, how much does the medical profession really want a cheap easy cure for cancer ?
 
billions in the balence for the Drug Cos.

this is why the health industry cannnot be left just to the free market
 
uscitizen said:
Which brings back up my point, how much does the medical profession really want a cheap easy cure for cancer ?
Click to expand...

i don't see why it wouldn't sooner or later any suppressed cure will come to the surface and the bad press would be worse than witholding the cure.

My point is that the cure WILL be profitable to the profession, as all cures have been in the past, and will be available when one is truly found.
 
besides, that would free huge resources up for cures for other diseases, which wouldn't be any less profitable that cancer work is now.

if what youare saying was true, then we wouldn't have antibiotics, poloi, mumps, etc cures, since it's more profitable to treat the symtoms than cure the disease; and tha, historically, has NOT happened at all.
 
If it is indeed ready for a Clinical Phase I trial, this work is tailor-made for NIH-NCI (National Cancer Institute). The side effects are a serious concern because it will be important to determine what's causing them; in other words is the effect of the drug really as specific against cancer as the article suggests?

If this is real, it's fantastic. There might be some concern among the administration of cancer hospitals about their futures, but I can't believe that they could get away with any efforts to stall this research, not when literally millions of lives may be at stake. My sister is a nurse and works partly at the cancer hospital in Toronto; I know that she and her colleagues would be delighted not to see their patients dying. They won't be out of work; their skills are still valid elsewhere.
 
HipLew said:
besides, that would free huge resources up for cures for other diseases, which wouldn't be any less profitable that cancer work is now.

if what youare saying was true, then we wouldn't have antibiotics, poloi, mumps, etc cures, since it's more profitable to treat the symtoms than cure the disease; and tha, historically, has NOT happened at all.
Click to expand...

the historical fact is that the face of the medical industry has changed drastically in the past 20 years.
 
Thorn said:
If it is indeed ready for a Clinical Phase I trial, this work is tailor-made for NIH-NCI (National Cancer Institute). The side effects are a serious concern because it will be important to determine what's causing them; in other words is the effect of the drug really as specific against cancer as the article suggests?

If this is real, it's fantastic. There might be some concern among the administration of cancer hospitals about their futures, but I can't believe that they could get away with any efforts to stall this research, not when literally millions of lives may be at stake. My sister is a nurse and works partly at the cancer hospital in Toronto; I know that she and her colleagues would be delighted not to see their patients dying. They won't be out of work; their skills are still valid elsewhere.
Click to expand...
As the article says, it seems too good to be true. :)

Well, we shall see. With some luck maybe we'll see within just a few years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top