Big pharma and the cure for cancer

[TheSocialistMetalhead]

So this whole ALS ice bucket challenge thing got me thinking.

You know how people are always saying the cure for cancer is already out there and the pharmaceutical companies are intently surpressing it?

Do you think this is true?

Also, if you think it isn't, what do you think are some of the other problems with big pharma stemming from the profit motive?

[DOOM]

When someone's talking about THE cancer, my inner doc starts to puke.

Really, stahp it

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

There are a million problems with 'big pharma'. To pick one that is relevant to your first question, due to the profit motive there is very little incentive to research and find treatments for diseases that only effect small numbers of people. Simply because the return on investment would not be enough to cover decades worth of research. Many forms of cancer don't have this problem, they effect tons and tons of people, which all represent a possible return on investment. That's why it wouldn't really make sense to suppress cures if they had them, that's a lot of money being wasted for no reason, other than just for the sake of being evil apparently.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Cancer isn't one disease, though. We know that there are 'wonder drugs' for some diseases already developed, for example the CimaVax drug developed in Cuba that effectively turns later-stage lung cancer into a chronic, manageable and non-fatal condition. So yeah, if R&D was motivated to achieve the best outcomes for patients rather than to achieve the greatest profit or constrained by some budget, then I imagine such drugs and maybe even cures for more cancers would be discovered quicker.

As it is, though, I don't think it's as simple to blame big pharma for cancer not being cured yet. As was said above, it's just not that simple. Cancer isn't one disease and I imagine finding a cure for the majority of cancers would take serious time.

[The Feral Underclass]

Cancer isn't just one "a" disease either, it is the primary cause of various other diseases and disorders.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

^^And, conversely, cancer itself can be caused by a multitude of other diseases and infections.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

As others have said, cancer isn't "one" disease but is a category of conditions.

I find it implausible that capitalist pharmaceutical companies would spend large sums of money develop a drug which they would not sell for profit, especially ones which the Capitalists themselves investing in these companies could benefit from. It is more likely that they have less incentive to develop such a drug in the first place. Often, those speaking of "secret cancer cures" are hawkers of snake oil, like those ads/fake news stories online ("The ONE CURE for XYZ that Pharma companies have been hiding from you - QUINOA JUICE")

[MarxSchmarx]

Bear in mind too that cost of shepharding a product to market can be prohibitive - it takes years even decades to get regulatory approval, making for a very risk averse investment climate.Drug development by big pharma, particularly for a multifaceted disease like cancer should be seen as a public good- it is one example of an industry where the profit motive fails to drive innovation

[ckaihatsu]

Big Pharma [from Childrens Hospital]

cG8RksCfxcw

[Slavic]

Bear in mind too that cost of shepharding a product to market can be prohibitive - it takes years even decades to get regulatory approval, making for a very risk averse investment climate.Drug development by big pharma, particularly for a multifaceted disease like cancer should be seen as a public good- it is one example of an industry where the profit motive fails to drive innovation

Profit motive would still be the primary motivator of research into treatments for cancer. There is already countless medication and equipment used to treat cancer, the profit is there, alive and well.

[The Intransigent Faction]

Big Pharma [from Childrens Hospital]

cG8RksCfxcw

I...don't know what to make of this.

Conspiracy theorists might not trust big pharma, but that doesn't mean everyone who has problems with big pharma is a conspiracy theorist. I'm sure you weren't suggesting that. I'm just not sure if this clip was meant as a serious drama or some kind of sarcastic shot at big pharma's critics.

As much as I can't stand Bill Maher (and don't trust his opinion on this issue after some of his claims about vaccines), and while I doubt there's some conspiracy to keep an existing cure hidden, I think he summed it up nicely:


There's no money in healthy people, and there's no money in dead people. The money is in the middle: people who are alive...but with one or more chronic conditions.

[ckaihatsu]

I...don't know what to make of this.


Another deer-in-the-headlights stunning...! (Score!)

= )





Conspiracy theorists might not trust big pharma, but that doesn't mean everyone who has problems with big pharma is a conspiracy theorist. I'm sure you weren't suggesting that. I'm just not sure if this clip was meant as a serious drama or some kind of sarcastic shot at big pharma's critics.


Mostly it was just free-association, and a bit of comic relief around here....





Childrens Hospital is a satirical American comedy television series and web series that lampoons the medical drama genre, created by and starring actor/comedian Rob Corddry.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Childrens_Hospital





As much as I can't stand Bill Maher (and don't trust his opinion on this issue after some of his claims about vaccines), and while I doubt there's some conspiracy to keep an existing cure hidden, I think he summed it up nicely:




There's no money in healthy people, and there's no money in dead people. The money is in the middle: people who are alive...but with one or more chronic conditions.


Agreed.

[Trap Queen Voxxy]

Cancer isn't just one "a" disease either, it is the primary cause of various other diseases and disorders.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, ok, but still even in my limited research and putting aside the fact that I'm into veterinary medicine not people "medicine" I still have seen enough studies and data indicating that across the board, "the cancer" is way more preventable, treatable and most importantly beatable, than the layman actually realizes and also that we actually understand it more now, than most people realize.

That being said, I do believe that cancer 'cures' are probably being largely surprised because making up new drugs, in itself in addition to also other factors, cancer is big business. It would make perfect business sense. In the same way big Pharma is also to blame for the suppression of medical marijuana research and the amazing benefits thereof including the treatment of cancer. Not just the symptoms of the cancer treatment but also the literal treatment of the disease itself. Curious, this natural, seemingly harmless plant leading to all this amazing shit, that simple, why suppress it? Because again, making up new drugs is big business. They don't even need to work.

[ckaihatsu]

---





[W]arburg presented additional evidence supporting his theory that the elevated anaerobiosis seen in cancer cells was a consequence of damaged or insufficient respiration. Put in his own words, "the prime cause of cancer is the replacement of the respiration of oxygen in normal body cells by a fermentation of sugar."[7]




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warburg_hypothesis





Because tumour cells are inefficient in processing ketone bodies for energy, the ketogenic diet has also been suggested as a treatment for cancer,[59] including glioma.[60]

A 2013 review said that there is enough suggestion of potential benefit from ketogenic diets in cancer therapy, that establishing clinical trials is probably warranted.[61] At present the only evidence of benefit is anecdotal, but designing effective trials to measure the effect of adopting a ketogenic diet could prove challenging.[62]




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketogenic_diet#Other_applications





8. Lemons contain modified citrus pectin and limonoids, which have been shown in a recent study to prohibit the spread of cancer cells, slow cancer cell growth and induce cancer cell death.




http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/03/01/lemon-benefits_n_2789780.html

[The Feral Underclass]

If pharmaceutical companies were will fully suppressing cancer curing drugs, we would know by now. You think pharma companies are more covert and powerful at keeping massive conspiracy secrets than the US government? You think investigative journalists, whistleblowers and hackers are just biding their time before thy break this story?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[The Feral Underclass]

Also, I have a friend who works in independent cancer research. If the science had been discovered it would have been discovered.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rottenfruit]

So this whole ALS ice bucket challenge thing got me thinking.

You know how people are always saying the cure for cancer is already out there and the pharmaceutical companies are intently surpressing it?

Do you think this is true?

Also, if you think it isn't, what do you think are some of the other problems with big pharma stemming from the profit motive?


No, if a drug company would find such a drug they would patent it immediately and put in on the market for two reasons

1. corporate espionage, if they try to hold to secret another pharmaceutical company might get a hold of it

2.Massive increase in stock, a drug that cure cancer would be the most profitable drug in the history and no company would take a change by hiding it and having the chance somebody else would do it is a risk no company would take.

[MarxSchmarx]

Profit motive would still be the primary motivator of research into treatments for cancer. There is already countless medication and equipment used to treat cancer, the profit is there, alive and well.
I don't disagree that this is the case, but thats really just a reflection of the fact that we live under capitalism. By definition the bulk of available treatment, like tikr almost every other commodities will be provided by the capitalists.

But to be ultimately successful in the stated goals of cancer erqdication, rd for an intractable problem like this still requires lots of speculation experimentation and lost leads. And if one looks at the list of novel therapeutic developments like personalized medicine very few come originally from pharmaceutical companies.