Canadian Scientists Cure Cancer... No One Notices?

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT
 

Apparently there is a viable, easy method to cure cancer that has been repeatedly tested and confirmed by Canadian scientists in Edmonton, Alberta but no companies have taken the product up because it can't be patented and is therefore unprofitable.

Canadian researchers find a simple cure for cancer, but major pharmaceutical companies are not interested.

Researchers at the University of Alberta, in Edmonton, Canada have cured cancer last week, yet there is a little ripple in the news or in TV. It is a simple technique using very basic drug. The method employs dichloroacetate, which is currently used to treat metabolic disorders. So, there is no concern of side effects or about their long term effects.

This drug doesn't require a patent, so anyone can employ it widely and cheaply compared to the costly cancer drugs produced by major pharmaceutical companies.

Canadian scientists tested this dichloroacetate (DCA) on human's cells; it killed lung, breast and brain cancer cells and left the healthy cells alone. It was tested on Rats inflicted with severe tumors; their cells shrank when they were fed with water supplemented with DCA. The drug is widely available and the technique is easy to use, why the major drug companies are not involved? Or the Media interested in this find?

In human bodies there is a natural cancer fighting human cell, the mitochondria, but they need to be triggered to be effective. Scientists used to think that these mitochondria cells were damaged and thus ineffective against cancer. So they used to focus on glycolysis, which is less effective in curing cancer and more wasteful. The drug manufacturers focused on this glycolysis method to fight cancer. This DCA on the other hand doesn't rely on glycolysis instead on mitochondria; it triggers the mitochondria which in turn fights the cancer cells.

The side effect of this is it also reactivates a process called apoptosis. You see, mitochondria contain an all-too-important self-destruct button that can't be pressed in cancer cells. Without it, tumors grow larger as cells refuse to be extinguished. Fully functioning mitochondria, thanks to DCA, can once again die.

With glycolysis turned off, the body produces less lactic acid, so the bad tissue around cancer cells doesn't break down and seed new tumors.

Pharmaceutical companies are not investing in this research because DCA method cannot be patented, without a patent they can't make money, like they are doing now with their AIDS Patent. Since the pharmaceutical companies won't develop this, the article says other independent laboratories should start producing this drug and do more research to confirm all the above findings and produce drugs. All the groundwork can be done in collaboration with the Universities, who will be glad to assist in such research and can develop an effective drug for curing cancer.

You can access the original research for this cancer here.

This article wants to raise awareness for this study, hope some independent companies and small startup will pick up this idea and produce these drugs, because the big companies won't touch it for a long time.

http://hubpages.com/hub/Scientists_cure_cancer__but_no_one_takes_notice

Thoughts?

Edit: Also I'm aware this article is a few years old but it doesn't change the fact that no one has picked it up.

That's amazing.

Depressing, but amazing. Oh well.

Holy shit, this is intense.

Also, it's Edmonton, Alberta.

Okay, my BS monitors are going off here. Mitochondria are a structure within the cell, not a type of cell. Further, they're essentially the powerplant of the cell; if cancer patients had non-functioning mitochondria, they'd be dead long before the cancer did anything. I'm going to have to see a more reliable source on this before I believe anything.

I just read this article earlier today. I wasn't entirely sure it was legit. I guess part of me is really hoping it isn't true that the only reason pharmaceutical companies aren't interested in this is because money can't be made.

People, please, stop acting like you know Biology, because half of you don't know two craps of what is written there...

This paper have been proved as fact by the community and many third party supporters are angry about this fact.

My thougths on this are simple. If this treatment works, it'll get adopted as common practice.

You shouldn't be suprised by the pharmaceutical giants not being interested. Believe it or not, they're not there for your benefit. They just want profit. If they could sell you a drug that cured one thing but caused another so you needed another medication to treat that problem rather than a simple cheap cure, they would.

These guys are right up there with insurance, cigarette and coffee companies. Fucking douchebags, the lot of them.

And people wonder why I rail on about what a sick fucked up system privatized healthcare is. In a socialized healthcare system, where people come ahead of money, we'd have jumped all over this. Too bad we'd rather make money by holding people's own lives hostage until they fork up the dough for a treatment.

So I guess these guys at the pharmaceutical companies CAN put a price on life. What a bunch of gits.

Owyn_Merrilin:
Okay, my BS monitors are going off here. Mitochondria are a structure within the cell, not a type of cell. Further, they're essentially the powerplant of the cell; if cancer patients had non-functioning mitochondria, they'd be dead long before the cancer did anything. I'm going to have to see a more reliable source on this before I believe anything.

Very true, this is.

Besides which, even if the pharmaceutical companies didn't like this, the media would be talking our ears off about it. This development would be most definitely in their interests, at least.

I really doubt the legitimacy of this article, I'm afraid.

/edit
Going through the comments on the article page, there are more than a few people pointing out some serious holes in this...

Ah, what a world we have come to where the paper in your pocket is deemed more important than the lives of millions by pharmaceutical companies. Well done corporation, you have once again shown how heartless you can be. Its a good thing these scientists are encouraging others to do something, but the media could still help.

Pretty sure we can cure Aids too, but a one time cure doesn't make anywhere as much cash as lifetime treatments.

AceAngel:
People, please, stop acting like you know Biology, because half of you don't know two craps of what is written there...

This paper have been proved as fact by the community and many third party supporters are angry about this fact.

Then the person who wrote the blog article didn't know what they were talking about; what I said about mitochondria was accurate.

Here's a link to the website of the university that made the actual discovery. The article that was linked was a piece of sensationalism; they're still in early trials, and in addition to this, the drug is already widely available, meaning there's no need for drug companies to invest further. Currently, it's an off label use that is being researched to become an on label use. Care to tell me where my biology fails?

Edit: Forgot to mention, according to the article I linked, the drug isn't even a cure for cancer. All it does is halt the growth, and allow other methods to kill the cells that are already there without having to worry about further growth. It's a break through, but not a cure in and of itself.

This is unbelievably awesome news, though I find it astonishing and shameful the article is 3 years old and there hasn't been hype over it.

What's the point of all the 'cure cancer' foundations if when a viable treatment is discovered they ignore it?

If the article is in fact truthful and the drug has been proven safe and effective how exactly would one go about treating a cancer with it if it's not a prescribed cancer-treatment medication? My father was just diagnosed with cancer and I'd love to see this help him.

Patrick_and_the_ricks:
Pretty sure we can cure Aids too, but a one time cure doesn't make anywhere as much cash as lifetime treatments.

No cure, but there's a vaccine in the works; it was recently proven to work on monkeys, and the next step is to make a version for human use. It's going to be a while, but there will almost definitely be a vaccine within our lifetimes.

Edit: Forgot to mention, there was a guy who was cured of aids recently, but it was a freak occurrence involving a bone marrow transplant from someone with a genetic mutation that essentially made him immune to aids. There may be a cure in that, but it's not exactly something that can be mass produced.

Source for the edit:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27683001/ns/health-aids/t/marrow-transplant-may-have-cured-mans-aids/

This isn't a conspiracy, it's just recent news. What this news article fails to mention is that this drug has never been widely tested on human beings. Research takes time, and no self-respecting doctor or drug manufacturer would ever prescribe a drug that has never been tested. It might work, or it might speed up the cancer growth, or it might cause coma and death. (All of these things are apparently possible with this chemical).

This exact news article seems poorly written - the author calls mitochondria cells when they are actually organelles, it implies that there is no mainstream media attention, and it implies that nobody has shown an interest in patenting or manufacturing this drug (both have happened).

Research is slow. This study is not the cure for cancer. It's an interesting result that might lead to interesting places.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/CancerPreventionAndTreatment/story?id=2848454&page=1

(Pardon my verbosity, but I'm a science guy with a personal interest in this sort of thing)

Yeah, as a third year science student, what that first post says about mitochondria makes absolutely no sense.
Also, there are a huge variety of cancers, like one for every tissue, and are a wide range of effective treatments for many of them. So there is no real guarantee this will work on all cancer types, so they haven't really cured it.
Also, glycolysis is the metabolising of glucose to produce energy, and not part of the immune response. Some of that stuff makes no sense, as I said.

There's more money in treating the disease then curing it.

Owyn_Merrilin:
Edit: Forgot to mention, according to the article I linked, the drug isn't even a cure for cancer. All it does is halt the growth, and allow other methods to kill the cells that are already there without having to worry about further growth. It's a break through, but not a cure in and of itself.

So it's another targeted anti-mitotic? I mean it's great if it has as few side effects as claimed at therapeutic dosages, but this isn't exactly the kind of breakthrough Glivec was, though without the ethical pricing issues.

The fact that the article uses the phrase "cure cancer" is a red flag. When people say things like that, you can be certain that they are a) full of shit and b) probably selling colloidal silver or other snake oil. B appears to be false in this case, but reviewing the wikipedia article we can find actual facts, like:

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

For those of you who aren't really up on oncology terminology, this is the same sort of thing that chemotherapy does, and is not the same as a cure. It sounds like is a drug which might be pretty useful, but hasn't made it to the market because nobody is stepping up to cover the (quite high) cost of doing clinical studies and bringing it to the market. It's a shame, but so are hunger, malaria, dengue fever, and a bunch of other things which we would have fixed already if there was any money to be made doing it. Horay for capitalism.

Chances are it's because this is most likely total bullshit.

Makes me think of this.... :S

http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/555181

Kpt._Rob:
And people wonder why I rail on about what a sick fucked up system privatized healthcare is. In a socialized healthcare system, where people come ahead of money, we'd have jumped all over this. Too bad we'd rather make money by holding people's own lives hostage until they fork up the dough for a treatment.

...Canada's healthcare system is socialized.

-m

My best friend is currently spinning in his grave.

I seriously doubt that something as monumental as the CURE FOR CANCER would just be ignored by mainstream media. Also, this article was written three years ago.

I'm calling bullshit on this one.

Matt_LRR:

Kpt._Rob:
And people wonder why I rail on about what a sick fucked up system privatized healthcare is. In a socialized healthcare system, where people come ahead of money, we'd have jumped all over this. Too bad we'd rather make money by holding people's own lives hostage until they fork up the dough for a treatment.

...Canada's healthcare system is socialized.

-m

Yes I realize that. It's kind of hard for a devoted liberal like myself to have not seen Michael Moore's documentary after all. My point was directed more towards the American capitalist system, one which I see being much slower to take up any treatment that isn't highly profitable.

I am glad I am not the only one who read this and went "wha, who wrote this??"

I have a 4yr degree in biology (well, Clinical Laboratory Sciences, technically....but I am two classes from finishing my bio degree) and reading that was painful. Either the discovery is complete bs, or the paper was written by a pr guy with no bio background who skimmed the research. Mitochondria are not cells, the are organelles (pointed out above, I believe) and if they are not "turned on", your cells cannot perform metabolism and you would, in fact, die.

Working in the healthcare field, I can also say that even if the drug itself cannot be patented, the pharm companies would still be interested because they would just patent a delivery system and launch a marketing campaign stating how wonderful they are because they developed a unique and effective way to deliver that vital, life saving drug DCA and now you too can get the treatments for only 5 buttmillion dollars per dose! How exciting!

Kpt._Rob:

Matt_LRR:

Kpt._Rob:
And people wonder why I rail on about what a sick fucked up system privatized healthcare is. In a socialized healthcare system, where people come ahead of money, we'd have jumped all over this. Too bad we'd rather make money by holding people's own lives hostage until they fork up the dough for a treatment.

...Canada's healthcare system is socialized.

-m

Yes I realize that. It's kind of hard for a devoted liberal like myself to have not seen Michael Moore's documentary after all. My point was directed more towards the American capitalist system, one which I see being much slower to take up any treatment that isn't highly profitable.

"America, Love it or Leave it."

OT: Now, that I've gotten my political retort out of the way... I'm questioning the legitimacy of this this article... All they'd have to do is tell a news station and they'd get it pasted all over everything.

Okay, the alarm bells went off after I saw the comments that were made 4 fucking years ago. That, and from the various comments calling this discovery as bullshit, I have a hard time believing that this is actually the break through that people want and is simply just an excuse to rally against Big Pharma.

The Moehlinator:
Working in the healthcare field, I can also say that even if the drug itself cannot be patented, the pharm companies would still be interested because they would just patent a delivery system and launch a marketing campaign stating how wonderful they are because they developed a unique and effective way to deliver that vital, life saving drug DCA and now you too can get the treatments for only 5 buttmillion dollars per dose! How exciting!

I actually just saw a commercial for extended release niacin, and there's a prescription fish oil out there, too. Yours for just dollars a day.

them big ol' companies wanna make cash not cure stuff.

Yassen:
Thoughts?

Edit: Also I'm aware this article is a few years old but it doesn't change the fact that no one has picked it up.

Actually, several universities have picked it up. I remember a few months ago, an area university successfully reproduced these results in tests with a particular kind of cancer. In human subjects, if I recall the e-mail correctly.

So this is being used... just on a small scale. Hopefully the repeat publications will allow doctors (rather than drug companies) to employ it anyway.

It's being ignored because it's Canada. They're too bussy being Canadian to run soul-crushing healthcare corperations.

ApeShapeDeity:
My thougths on this are simple. If this treatment works, it'll get adopted as common practice.

You shouldn't be suprised by the pharmaceutical giants not being interested. Believe it or not, they're not there for your benefit. They just want profit. If they could sell you a drug that cured one thing but caused another so you needed another medication to treat that problem rather than a simple cheap cure, they would.

These guys are right up there with insurance, cigarette and coffee companies. Fucking douchebags, the lot of them.

I got given a document about the Illuminati by my friend recently and it had a section concerning how they make us ill so we go and take their medication which is tailored to make us more ill so we will then go and take more medication.
Whether you believe in the Illuminati or not, this rings true.
The amount of people I've seen get really fucked up on prescription medication is astonishing, when they probably would've been far better off drinking plenty of ginger tea and sleeping it off.
Of course, that won't work for cancer or anything, but then look at all the stuff about Cannabis' cancer fighting properties...

Not to mention all the stuff I personally got told about my depression being a chemical imbalance, which they then gave me pills for.
Y'know how I beat my depression?
By getting away to a rural area for a week and sitting under trees simply not worrying.
Chemical imbalance my ass.
To me that stinks of literal lies and misinformation.

Thumper17:
Holy shit, this is intense.

Also, it's Edmonton, Alberta.

Alberta is weird, like Florida. But IN CANADA!

-tom

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked