Reply to Re: A cure for cancer found
If you don't have an account, just leave the password field blank.
Money is not a problem when it comes to manufacturing the drug. Money is a problem because the research showing drug efficacy and safety hasn't been completed. That must be done before the drug can be approved by government bodies for medical use.
Read more from decent sources, e.g.
http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100512/full/news.2010.236.html
Notably:
'The results are preliminary, but may be enough to get the attention of pharmaceutical companies, says Lewis Cantley, a cancer researcher at the Harvard Medical School in Massachusetts. "It's very difficult with such a small number of patients to conclude what's going on, but it's certainly encouraging," he says.' [note: small number of patients because they can't afford a large study]
'Michelakis [head of research team] remains opposed to self-medication of cancer patients with DCA, given how little is known about the effects of the drug [my emphasis] and how it may interact with other medications: "If there is even a little bit of hope, should we be providing it to people? No, because there is a chance you might hurt them and make them even worse." '
You talk about "they" keeping it secret as if all these people (university researchers, pharma researchers, pharma business people, media, doctors, etc.) are one entity. They're not. Some of those people have conflicts of interest, but most don't. Those that don't have conflict of interest, and are experts in the area, will speak up when it is appropriate. Until then stop trashing your mind with rubbish blogs.
Along with the nature article, here is another respectable source:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/05/dichloroacetate_and_cancer.php
(btw does a NY Times article count as "almost NOTHING AT ALL"?:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/30/health/30cancer.html?_r=1&hp=&pagewanted=all)
Read more from decent sources, e.g.
http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100512/full/news.2010.236.html
Notably:
'The results are preliminary, but may be enough to get the attention of pharmaceutical companies, says Lewis Cantley, a cancer researcher at the Harvard Medical School in Massachusetts. "It's very difficult with such a small number of patients to conclude what's going on, but it's certainly encouraging," he says.' [note: small number of patients because they can't afford a large study]
'Michelakis [head of research team] remains opposed to self-medication of cancer patients with DCA, given how little is known about the effects of the drug [my emphasis] and how it may interact with other medications: "If there is even a little bit of hope, should we be providing it to people? No, because there is a chance you might hurt them and make them even worse." '
You talk about "they" keeping it secret as if all these people (university researchers, pharma researchers, pharma business people, media, doctors, etc.) are one entity. They're not. Some of those people have conflicts of interest, but most don't. Those that don't have conflict of interest, and are experts in the area, will speak up when it is appropriate. Until then stop trashing your mind with rubbish blogs.
Along with the nature article, here is another respectable source:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/05/dichloroacetate_and_cancer.php
(btw does a NY Times article count as "almost NOTHING AT ALL"?:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/30/health/30cancer.html?_r=1&hp=&pagewanted=all)
