Canadian scientists find cancer cure. Pharmaceutical companies not interested.

[dennilfloss]

...because it won't make them a ton of money. Should government get involved with pharmaceutical research? For example, Canadian scientists are reported to have found a cancer cure that looks real promising but pharmaceutical companies are not interested since it won't make them much money.

http://bit.ly/jD7dVj

I tend to lean towards the opinion that, particularly under a system of single-payer-type universal healthcare, our government should get involved with funding & implementation as this development could significantly decrease healthcare costs for our aging population if it really works that well, not to mention all the grief and suffering that could be alleviated and those have social costs too. It just strikes me as the thing a civilized and evolved society that emphasizes the good of many over the good of a few would do for its population.


This article is 4 years old. They did not find a cancer cure. Even the update says that not only can no conclusions be made on whether the drug is safe or effective in patients with this form of brain cancer, but that use of DCA by patients or physicians in any but research trials is not only inappropriate but may also be dangerous.

admin allisolm

 

[SandEagle]

there is no profit in cures. there is only profit in treatments.

 

[Imp]

there is no profit in cures. there is only profit in treatments.

Same reason more is spent on baldness/Viagra drugs than a bunch of life-threatening diseases. Can't blame them. I'd like money too.

 

[Brigandier]

The Canadians didn't cure cancer, they just got a Texas Mickey and made shit up.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

there is no profit in cures. there is only profit in treatments.

lol

 

[thecrecarc]

IIRC, this is not new. Some doctors have already been prescribing it for cancer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dichloroacetic_acid#Off-label_use

Some key quotes:
"Akbar and Humaira Khan have since March 2007 treated cancer patients using DCA off-label at their private clinic, Medicor Cancer Centres"

"some patients "are showing varied positive responses to DCA including tumour shrinkage, reduction in tumour markers, symptom control, and improvement in lab tests".

"In 2010 it was found that for human colorectal tumours grown in mice, under hypoxic conditions, DCA decreased rather than increased apoptosis, resulting in enhanced growth of the tumours.These findings suggest that at least in some cancer types DCA treatment could be detrimental to patient health, highlighting the need for further testing before it can be considered a safe and effective cancer treatment."

 

[DangerAardvark]

Why are there 4 year-old comments on the article? Also this:

In human bodies there is a natural cancer fighting human cell, the mitochondria, but they need to be triggered to be effective.

 

[DangerAardvark]

there is no profit in cures. there is only profit in treatments.

Yep, that's the narrative alright. And there seems to be no end of people grasping at straws in order to support it.

 

[dennilfloss]

Here's the update.

http://www.dca.med.ualberta.ca/Home/Updates/2010-05-12_Update.cfm

 

[thecrecarc]

A mitochondria is an organelle, not a cell. Article fail.

 

[PottedMeat]

A mitochondria is an organelle, not a cell. Article fail.

maybe the author should stick to writing pomes

cgull8m on HubPages

I love Hubpages, I learn new things every day here. There are pretty smart hubbers here in diverse topics.

I also write poetry, quotes and short stories. You can check my quotes and poems in my blog here.

 

[cubby1223]

there is no profit in cures. there is only profit in treatments.

*sigh*

So not true it's not even funny anymore to read.

Did it make you feel smart posting your opinion?

 

[senseamp]

The drug already exists and is widely available. What more is needed from the drug companies?

 

[Bignate603]

there is no profit in cures. there is only profit in treatments.

It scares me that people actually believe that this is the reason why we don't have cures for diseases.

 

[Imp]

It scares me that people actually believe that this is the reason why we don't have cures for diseases.

There should actually be figures out there showing that the money spent on "lesser" medical issues is higher for those that are more profitable.

Too lazy to look, so feel free to prove me wrong.

 

[Pliablemoose]

If you nutjobs think even for a second that "big pharma" wouldn't sell their soul for a cancer cure, you're sadly mistaken.

Just for bragging rights alone, they'd fund clinical trials.

 

[rudeguy]

I thought URL shorteners were banned

 

[SandEagle]

It scares me that people actually believe that this is the reason why we don't have cures for diseases.

ahh, Littlenate603 shows up just in time to show just how little he knows.

 

[Bignate603]

There should actually be figures out there showing that the money spent on "lesser" medical issues is higher for those that are more profitable.

Too lazy to look, so feel free to prove me wrong.

There's huge amounts of research dollars spent by non-profit groups looking for cures for things like cancer and AIDS. They don't care about turning a profit.

 

[Bignate603]

ahh, Littlenate603 shows up just in time to show just how little he knows.

As opposed to you who shows how little he knows with every post?

Here's the reasons why your argument about pharmaceutical companies choosing not cure things is wrong:

1. Non-profits do huge amount of cancer research, they don't care about profits. The guys doing research at universities are all about getting recognition from their peers. Curing cancer would make them a rock star in their research community.
2. Any pharmaceutical company that cures cancer can charge ridiculous amounts for it and will instantly get 100% of the market. They'll blow their competitors out of the water.
3. Countries that have any form of government provided healthcare are incredibly interested in finding cures and are behind a large amount of research dollars spent.

 

[Capt Caveman]

there is no profit in cures. there is only profit in treatments.

Like usual, incorrect. Do a little research before posting.

I'm sure the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute would have no interest in curing cancer. A world renown Cancer Institute trying to cure cancer. A non-profit that I have had the pleasure of volunteering for and donating to in hopes of finding a cure for cancer.

 

[TheVrolok]

This about DCA again? Oh, it is? Jury is still out on the final verdict, but it is very interesting research. Claiming that the cure for cancer has been found is absolutely absurd, and equally absurd is claiming that pharm companies wouldn't want in. The first company that would bring a cancer cure to the market? I can't even imagine the money.

 

[rudeguy]

Like usual, incorrect. Do a little research before posting.

let him tinfoil hat it. People like that refuse to believe that big corporations can do something good.

 

[Bignate603]

let him tinfoil hat it. People like that refuse to believe that big corporations can do something good.

Actually, in the case mentioned in the OP the big corporations may not be able to do anything, even if the drug looks very promising. It's a generic, meaning that anyone can make it without paying any licensing. If any pharmaceutical company pays to do all the work to get it approved then anyone could make and sell it, they'd never recoup their costs. They'd spend millions without having a hope of ever making money off it.

This is why there are so many non-profits and government funded research, they'll test the promising things without worrying about their ability to recoup their costs.

 

[rudeguy]

Actually, in the case mentioned in the OP the big corporations may not be able to do anything, even if the drug looks very promising. It's a generic, meaning that anyone can make it without paying any licensing. If any pharmaceutical company pays to do all the work to get it approved then anyone could make and sell it, they'd never recoup their costs. They'd spend millions without having a hope of ever making money off it.

This is why there are so many non-profits and government funded research, they'll test the promising things without worrying about their ability to recoup their costs.

here's a protip:

Most nonprofit and damn near all government funded research companies are more worried about making a buck than big pharma.

Do you think $10 mil means anything to J&J?