maybe.. but then after cancer what other horrendous disease would we unleash on ourselfs? or what negative effects will it have on humans? what if the cure strengthens AIDS and HIV?? its a risky chance...
This link proves my point that no one I've told has believed that cancer has already been cured and that the liberal media refuses to spread the word because it helps their cause. Also, pharmaceuticals refuse to invest in it because it is cheap, unpatented, and easy to use. In other words, they will make no money. Spread the word!
Hm, interesting. Some more research into dichloroacetate reveals this.
The take home points as I see it are:
1) Preliminary results appear somewhat promising but a review of the medical literature (try PubMed) highlight a few possible issues (e.g. DCA liver carcinogenicity in mice...isn't this supposed to be a cancer cure?).
2) Lack of patent and costs of seeking FDA approval do make this economically unfavorable. Big issue for the politics buffs.
3) No phase III trials have been performed, but a preliminary phase II human trial is underway. Stay tuned.
Also, I don't understand how the liberal media refuses to spread this cause. I actually feel that at this point it would be irresponsible to do so for one, and in my experience, the media only publicly disseminates medical research info up to 3-4 years after the fact.
I think we will find ways to deter cancer, but I don't think there is a real cure, after all it is the uncontrollable growth of cells right? How would you go about curing that?
PLus it seems there is quite a bit of corruption in charitable organizations. In 1992, the Chronicle of Philanthropy reported the American Cancer Society was desperately requesting donations to support its programs, all the while holding $750,000,000 in cash and real estate assets that were not being used.
I also think a cure for HIV/Aids is more necessary. I believe more people have it, although I think alot of labs have given up their research into it as they haven't been able to make enough headway.
Impeccable research there, Strop...always on the ball :P
But yeah, money unfortunately does make the world go around and the proliferation of a cure could be slowed if there isn't money to be made - especially in the more capitalistic nations where there is less governmental support for health care. This doesn't' mean that the liberal media has anything to do with that, though.
"not everyone is convinced it will turn out to be a miracle drug. There have been many therapies that were promising in vitro and in animal models that did not work for one reason or another in humans"
In other words, don't get your hopes up till it's proven. And it isn't covered up by the liberal media, they just havent gotten word of it. And I'm sure you've noticed by now that medical + scientific news doesn't get reported on the mainstream news programs very often. Car accidents, and gruesome murders make more money. Still no cover up though. By the way the term "liberal Media" seems to have just come up in the past 2 years, and it sounds to me like people use it in alot of different ways, often to demean the media, so i hate it when people use it.
Oh Strat, it only took me maybe three minutes :P Speed research ftw.
Tangential:
By the way the term "liberal Media" seems to have just come up in the past 2 years, and it sounds to me like people use it in alot of different ways, often to demean the media, so i hate it when people use it.
I've noticed this- in particular I think there's a bit of a backlash. One acquaintance of mine cynically expressed this as "eople like to look smart by not trusting the institution". In a way it's true, however, as bandwagon politics is almost unavoidable in the face of a world of information too large to fathom. I'm guessing it's a sign of the times- though the media has always gotten the stick end of things one way or another, for reasons both well-founded and tenuous.
If the cancer is confined to one location and has not spread, the goal for treatment would be surgery and cure. This is often the case with skin cancers. If the tumor has spread to local lymph nodes only, sometimes these can also be removed. If all of the cancer cannot be removed with surgery, the options for treatment include radiation, chemotherapy, or both. Some cancers require a combination of surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy.
Treatment is diffucult to do, but there are many ways to keep your strength in the process.
Radiation treatment is painless. Treatment is usually scheduled every weekday. You should allow 30 minutes for each treatment session although the treatment itself usually takes only a few minutes. You should get plenty of rest and eat a well-balanced diet during the course of your radiation therapy. Skin in the treated area may become sensitive and easily irritated. Side effects of radiation treatment are usually temporary and vary depending on the area of the body that is being treated.
lol moegreche, gotta love chuck norris jokes and i think that we will find the cure for cancer sometime in the next 40 to 60 years, or at least a cure for som STDs
In all seriousness though, I do believe with time there will be a cure, not the "I Am Legend" kind of cure, but definitely something could alleviate the suffering from some forms of cancer (i.e. be it colon or lung, etc.). It's definitely a question without an answer, and I doubt many users on the site could answer accurately anyhow :P
