Scientists Cure Cancer, But No One Takes Notice

[Deleted]

money they stand to lose if but a single company produces it - do you really think they would ALL do nothing or do you think atleast one of them would make money off it before the others...

U understand that ur comment was an empty response, dont u? If pharmaceutical companies make revenue by selling long-term, costly treatments, WHY would they wanna invest in a "instant" treatment?? Is it so hard to understand this business concept? It works the same as WOW after Activision, actually...

[braxx]

How about by curing people of cancer it allows them to keep them alive longer to sell them their other products for longer?

Blizzard's next CEO here

[Reeve]

U understand that ur comment was an empty response, dont u? If pharmaceutical companies make revenue by selling long-term, costly treatments, WHY would they wanna invest in a "instant" treatment?? Is it so hard to understand this business concept? It works the same as WOW after Activision, actually...

Extending the lives of patients by curing cancer also increases revenue because it extends the amount of time you can sell them medications.

[Kasierith]

The average pills and treatment a cancer patient receives over time, are far pricer than this "cure". The pharmaceutical companies know this.

The opportunity to patent it and cut out every other pharmaceutical company from income from oncology medication would far outweigh the benefit of only having a partial share of the overall funds in the market

[Catta]

U understand that ur comment was an empty response, dont u? If pharmaceutical companies make revenue by selling long-term, costly treatments, WHY would they wanna invest in a "instant" treatment?? Is it so hard to understand this business concept? It works the same as WOW after Activision, actually...

Because all it would take to bring their companies crashing down was a single manufacturer - doesnt have to be an american company mind you - to produce the cure so obviously none would likely risk it

[BLCalliente]

The opportunity to patent it and cut out every other pharmaceutical company from income from oncology medication would far outweigh the benefit of only having a partial share of the overall funds in the market

Would it? If the cure was cheap enough, I don't think that's the case at all.

The company who patented it would also be losing out on that money from oncology medication and might not be able to remain in operation at that point.

[Kasierith]

Would it? If the cure was cheap enough, I don't think that's the case at all.

The company who patented it would also be losing out on that money from oncology medication and might not be able to remain in operation at that point.

The vast majority of drug costs come from research, not the raw products. The company would be able to define their own price until such a time as the patent wears off and allowing competition. It's just how drug research works. Research and develop it, put your investment in the hopes of success, put it on the market, and hope that by the time the drug goes generic you made a substantial profit off of it. The company wouldn't set the price low enough to hurt profit, especially on such a highly desired product. Demand determines market price more than supply

[Reeve]

Would it? If the cure was cheap enough, I don't think that's the case at all.

The company who patented it would also be losing out on that money from oncology medication and might not be able to remain in operation at that point.

Most drugs are quite inexpensive to produce. They're just expensive to research, and those costs are passed on to the consumers, at least in the US. The cure being cheap to manufacture would just ensure really high profit margins during the years the cure was still under patent.

[Reyzzz]

Cure for cancer: take 1 teaspoon of sodium bicarbonate with glass of water two times a day for a week and you are cured. 1 kg of the stuff costs about 3 €

[Kasierith]

Cure for cancer: take 1 teaspoon of sodium bicarbonate with glass of water two times a day for a week and you are cured. 1 kg of the stuff costs about 3 €

So... the cure to cancer is alka-seltzer?

[Reeve]

So... the cure to cancer is alka-seltzer?

I wish I'd known cancer was really just a bad case of heartburn!

[Reyzzz]

So... the cure to cancer is alka-seltzer?

No idea what that is but if you mean baking soda, then yes.

[plagueshard801]

doesnt sound legit.

[Needalight]

Please link to article on boner pill!

Thanks for the outburst I laughed pretty wicked.

[Illuwin]

This thread again? There's one on like page 2 with the exact same crap.

No ones cured cancer, research continues

No ones withholding the 'cure' for cancer for uber amounts of money, or you'd see the ultra rich magically be cured after going into a secret lab in a remote island that probably has a volcano and someone plotting to take over the world.

No regulatory body (such as the FDA) is withholding cancer research and advances for money, that's just ludicrous and too stupid to argue against. Hint: other countries have different regulations if the FDA was such a scary bigbad they could just hop over to Canada or Mexico or any country that isn't the USA. Further, the cost of cancer on a government, of which the bigbad scary wary FDA is a part of, would far exceed revenues generated by a drug.

A 'cure' for cancer would not eradicate the disease, thus all arguments of it being withheld for money are stupid, as cancer would still occur, thus providing recurring revenue of selling these magical cancer cure-all pills or vaccinations. Apply to same argument to withholding a vaccine for Polio or another infectious disease we currently are vaccinated against. People are born, more vaccinations must be produced, money is generated, argument for withholding is invalidated.

9/11 wasn't an inside job, no ones hiding a magic cancer pill, radio stations don't subliminally send mind control messages, and all other stupid conspiracy "I'm the only one who can see the light its everyone else that is sheeple!" argument are, to purposfully repeat a very fun and powerful word, stupid.

[zEmini]

Sharks do not get cancer.

Therefore the cure is to become a shark.

[Kasierith]

The ultimate difficulty in fighting cancer is that it is still part of your body. If you put a cancerous cell and a normal, healthy cell next to each other, many times there won't be any visible difference. The primary difference is that the cancer cell typically stops performing its function in the body, and then reproduces again and again and again. These cells also typically do not undergo apoptosis because if that method were available to them, the cell would have killed itself before it was even finished replicating. So the only current way to treat cancer, apart from surgery, is to use toxins that kill off rapidly dividing cells, such as cancer cells. It is actually the exact same reason why we can't find a cure for HIV. HIV viruses coat themselves in the membrane of their cellular victims, thus hiding from other white blood cells by pretending to be a normal part of the body. The body can't get rid of them because the body regards them as self. I suspect that when we find the cure for one, we'll find the cure for the other as well... because the best bet in curing both is finding out how to tell the body to attack certain parts of itself that are actually the disease in disguise

[Artravus]

I didn't know that the mitochondria is a cell nowadays.

Well, I can tell that whoever wrote that isn't very smart/wasn't paying attention/didn't edit or revise the paper, therefore, I'm not believing a thing it says.

[Deleted]

Extending the lives of patients by curing cancer also increases revenue because it extends the amount of time you can sell them medications.

ROFL. Really? Ujust really wrote that? Ucant b serious...

[Skandulous]

In all fairness, viagra was originally made to be good for relaxing the heart in heart-disease patients, just that it wasn't all that great at it and an erection was a "side effect" that they decided to make good of

lol people with heart problems or heart conditions shouldnt take viagra and should consult with a doctor first