Cancer cure - found

[seahawk]

Some people may have found an actual cure for cancer:

hubpages.com/hub/Scientists_cure_cancer__but_no_one_takes_notice

Hooray for Canada!


Spread the good word...

[WestRider]

This has nothing that wasn't discovered at least four years ago. Research is still ongoing and inconclusive. Here's the American Cancer Society's page on DCA for more information on actual research. Just as a note, the stuff causes serious nerve and liver damage, and is itself a possible carcinogen.

[seahawk]

Neat! Knew it'd be too good to be true.

[Tyrantor]

You've also got to remember that a company will almost never invest in a cure for cancer - harsh as it may sound.
As many will know, a company doesn't care about cures, it cares about treatments. There's no money to be made in a cure.

[andy089]

The thing about that stuff is - there is no patent for it, since its an already-used chemical. So why should a company conduct research if another company could just "steal" their results?

The other thing is: It doesn't cure EVERY cancer. it kills glycolytic cells, but a cancer cell most often is a cell with mutated DNA and there it doesn't help at all.

I have to disagree with Dr'ochtyr. There IS money to be made in a cure. if not - Why would you try to find cure for anything then? People will always get cancer, just as people will always get the flu (I know they are triggered by totally different things but you still get both of them sooner or later, given a long enough lifespan). And if you think about it: You could set the price of this drug as high as you want: How much would you pay to live?

[Alice]

I think the article sounds a bit iffy, because they say there is a 'cell' in the body called a motochondria.

Mitochondria are actually organelles, much smaller than a cell, and found within all cells. They produce 'food' for the cells.

[Tyrantor]

May 17, 2011 19:30:50 GMT andy089 said:

The thing about that stuff is - there is no patent for it, since its an already-used chemical. So why should a company conduct research if another company could just "steal" their results?

The other thing is: It doesn't cure EVERY cancer. it kills glycolytic cells, but a cancer cell most often is a cell with mutated DNA and there it doesn't help at all.

I have to disagree with Dr'ochtyr. There IS money to be made in a cure. if not - Why would you try to find cure for anything then? People will always get cancer, just as people will always get the flu (I know they are triggered by totally different things but you still get both of them sooner or later, given a long enough lifespan). And if you think about it: You could set the price of this drug as high as you want: How much would you pay to live?

It's not that there's not money to be made, it's just that there's more money to be made in treatments than a cure.
Significantly more money.

[Geneva]

I have to disagree. Not so much with your depiction of corporate sincerity but more so with their likelihood of one backing a cure regardless. A breakthrough for a cure for cancer would likely get government funding as well as support from various non-profit groups anyway if a company didn't take it up, anyway so long as the researchers had something to back up their claims.
At least, by investing, a company would get something out of the cure rather than just let a portion their production line just become redundant with nothing to replenish it. A good business person looks at how he can profit from the new, not maintain the old. That's how a corporation grows.

[andy089]

the thing is tho that there can't really be a cure for cancer. your treatment might work so well that all cancer cells die, but you can still get cancer again the next day.
Happy Birthday btw lol

[The Tomato]

To be fair though. Mitocondria were probably cells millions of years ago. They have their own genome and its likley that they just entered as parasites and hung around since it made their lives easier and allowed for enough energy to produce multicellular organisms.

So basically, its not wrong. Its just Really Really out of date.

Still, no worries?

[Tyrantor]

May 18, 2011 2:13:41 GMT andy089 said:

Happy Birthday btw lol

Haha thanks man.

[Peepleafity]

Happy b-day

Alice, it doesn't make food it turns energy sources (sugars) into energy with byproducts and the energy in the for of atp.
It is a long and complex system for getting the energy into a useable form.

Tomato, same with chlorophyll, and with a few other organelles.

And I was thinking of all those other reasons people mentioned even before I read them. P:

-Peeps

[coff]

And I was so ready to go out and buy a carton of marbs. Yea, there are a great deal of potential cures but no solid leads saying yes, this is likely it.

When it happens, it will be much more publicized.

[Alice]

May 18, 2011 12:31:04 GMT Peepleafity said:

Happy b-day

Alice, it doesn't make food it turns energy sources (sugars) into energy with byproducts and the energy in the for of atp.
It is a long and complex system for getting the energy into a useable form.

Tomato, same with chlorophyll, and with a few other organelles.

And I was thinking of all those other reasons people mentioned even before I read them. P:

-Peeps

Oh Peeps, I knew that; I didn't want to make things overly complicated because not everyone would. I learnt all about Mitochondria when I did A-Level biology, but simplified it down for the sake of my comment.

*feels patronised*

[The Tomato]

Whoa, whoa. Not trying to patronise you. just pulling an incredebly dump joke about it.

But since ive met people who think that cells are a type of protein and that DNA is just something we made up to steal their children away from [Insert Faith Here] I thought i might as well include some exposition.

Still, no worries?