Cure for Cancer that is trying to be repressed!

Both the National Cancer Institute and several pharmaceutical companies declined to pay for the research. Neither applicants nor funders discuss the reasons an application is turned down. But good guesses are the general shortage of funds and the concept tried in this experiment was too novel and, thus, too risky for consideration.

www.msnbc.msn.com...

Sickening what these people do for greed and money!

reply to post by Htrowklis82


Your title is slightly misleading. No one tried to “suppress” anything, the article clearly stated that the concept was so novel that few wanted to take a chance on it.

Its all about profit at the cost of human life for these evil businesses...

Make money and start independent research laboratory is the key if the pharmaceutical do not want to do it. May cost a lot but the cure may be released and for real someday.


Thruthseek3r

This study was started around 2009, so it takes a while to write up these things.

www.nejm.org...=articleTop

The therapy requires each individual patient's white cells to be genetically modified then re-infused back into the body to fight the cancer. It's not something that can necessarily be mass-produced in a factory like a pharmaceutical company might do. The process itself is more of what might be patentable (I'm not an patent attorney). So, it might not be as interesting to a pharmaceutical company. Still, why does everyone think that it's the government that has to fund all these things? A private non-profit group was able to provide enough initial funding and they were able to try the treatment on 3 patients before they published their findings. It is "we the people" who would better be able to decide to which causes we contribute. Now that there have been positive results, the Alliance for Cancer Gene Therapy (which provided the funds) will have more of the publicity to attract additional donations.

Hopefully, this treatment will become more commonplace if it proves successfully generalizable through additional trials.

I'm currently working on a cure for cancer, which involves brown recluse spider venom. the idea is that the venom is directly introduced into the tumor, then the tumor is eaten away by the highly acidic venom and turned into a fibrous raisin that the immune system can dissolve and flush out. now all i need is a terminal cancer victim to introduce the venom into and document the affects, and if it proves to be of an all natural benefit and does what i believe will occur, then we will be one more step closer to ridding the body of aggressive tumors and the use of chemicals, drugs, and radical radiation treatment.

if you're going to fight fire with fire , do it all natural

because clearly them damn spiders don't have any other use other than messing peoples skin up

Originally posted by SirMike
reply to post by Htrowklis82

 

Your title is slightly misleading. No one tried to “suppress” anything, the article clearly stated that the concept was so novel that few wanted to take a chance on it.

Novel?
Because life threatening bone marrow transplants, radiation and chemo are such better options. Several of these treatments take months to be affective with awful side affects. As well as for this type of cancer, life long treatment with expensive chemo and radiation is required to keep this chronic cancer in check.
More likely the pharmaceuticals risk the loss of millions if not billions in cash, from a one shot wonder drug that only causes mild flu like symptoms that can melt pounds of cancer in weeks. These were clearly advanced cancer cases, if each of the 3 patients had at least 5 pounds of cancer.
This method also has the potential to be used for other types of cancer as well!
We would have never known about it, if it had not been independently funded from a charity started by the family of a deceased child that had cancer.

Gosh I sure hope novel idea's like this are kept in check by the National Cancer Institute and by pharmaceuticals! Wouldn't want to get too close to a cure!
because there is no emoticon that clearly states my sarcasm!

Originally posted by Htrowklis82

Originally posted by SirMike
reply to post by Htrowklis82

 

Your title is slightly misleading. No one tried to “suppress” anything, the article clearly stated that the concept was so novel that few wanted to take a chance on it.

Novel?
Because life threatening bone marrow transplants, radiation and chemo are such better options. Several of these treatments take months to be affective with awful side affects. As well as for this type of cancer, life long treatment with expensive chemo and radiation is required to keep this chronic cancer in check.
More likely the pharmaceuticals risk the loss of millions if not billions in cash, from a one shot wonder drug that only causes mild flu like symptoms that can melt pounds of cancer in weeks. These were clearly advanced cancer cases, if each of the 3 patients had at least 5 pounds of cancer.
This method also has the potential to be used for other types of cancer as well!
We would have never known about it, if it had not been independently funded from a charity started by the family of a deceased child that had cancer.

Gosh I sure hope novel idea's like this are kept in check by the National Cancer Institute and by pharmaceuticals! Wouldn't want to get too close to a cure!

because there is no emoticon that clearly states my sarcasm!

edit on 10-8-2011 by Htrowklis82 because: (no reason given)

Well, the next time an opportunity like this comes around you can exercise your authority over limited grant monies and use your decades worth of experience in oncology, hematological malignancy, and clinical pharmacology to make a different determination. I am sure everyone will be all ears to listen to you valued expert opinions on the subject.

reply to post by SirMike


There is no cure because funds and grants are purposely misdirected at pointless research, because the loss of billions of dollars would affect not only pharmaceuticals, but the prestige and wallets of the men who sit at the top of these institutes.
If a cure for cancer is found, research is no longer needed...Congress stops giving them billions in free money. Money is lost across the board!
Hospitals, drug companies, radiological, many medical industries dried up!
Cancer charities would cease to have millions pouring in!
Training for thousands of oncology doctors would be moot!
No one at the top wants a cure for cancer....The race for the cure is a huge money sucking fraud!
Hundreds of scientists and independent researchers who find cures or more successful therapies are taken to court or horribly discredited by these huge powerful institutes all in the name of money and greed!

modified hiv cancer cure

I just found this.Maybe this treatment is going to get a boost.It is kinda scary to me.I want to have a workable cure but at what price with modified hiv.

reply to post by deadeyedick


I agree the modified HIV part could get out of hand, or present some unknown future issue.
However, I have an idea that scientists have a pretty good handle on how to deactivate its dangerous qualities.....

Originally posted by anumohi
I'm currently working on a cure for cancer, which involves brown recluse spider venom. the idea is that the venom is directly introduced into the tumor, then the tumor is eaten away by the highly acidic venom and turned into a fibrous raisin that the immune system can dissolve and flush out. now all i need is a terminal cancer victim to introduce the venom into and document the affects, and if it proves to be of an all natural benefit and does what i believe will occur, then we will be one more step closer to ridding the body of aggressive tumors and the use of chemicals, drugs, and radical radiation treatment.

if you're going to fight fire with fire , do it all natural

because clearly them damn spiders don't have any other use other than messing peoples skin up

I have heard of people drinking blue scorpion venom.

reply to post by deadeyedick


I heard of Multiple Sclerosis patients being voluntarily stung with bees....Something in the venom was working for controlling their symptoms!
health.howstuffworks.com...

Originally posted by Htrowklis82
Both the National Cancer Institute and several pharmaceutical companies declined to pay for the research. Neither applicants nor funders discuss the reasons an application is turned down. But good guesses are the general shortage of funds and the concept tried in this experiment was too novel and, thus, too risky for consideration.

www.msnbc.msn.com...

Sickening what these people do for greed and money!

The "lack of money" comes from "science funding was cut to the bone during the Bush administration (when this research first surfaced.) Pharmaceutical companies generally fund their own research and any grants given to independent researchers are small.

Having tried for a number of grants, I can tell you that there's a LOT of scientists and very few grant opportunities. They give the money to those with the most promising evidence. As of now, they have a small sample of just three people and no long-term studies.

Here's the list of nearly 800 things that were approved for grants from the NIH If you check the National Institute of Health, you can see another thousand research trials taking place all over the country and checking out everything from complementary therapy to gene therapy.

There's a number of reasons why their grant may have failed to make:
* The money went to research that was already promising (in other words, proved in an animal model or in cell models and based on an active research line)
* They did a bad job of writing up the research proposal (this happens. Like I said, I've been involved with some of these and it's REALLY HARD to write a proposal that's accepted.)
* They didn't have enough research data
* It hadn't been tested on any animal models or humans

...etc.

If you were in charge of a fund of (say) a million dollars and you had 500 scientists ALL asking you to give them some money, are you going to hand everyone $2,000 and say "go for it!" (that would fund about one week of research work, by the way) or will you select the two that you think are most likely to succeed and give them enough money to do research for two years?

Grant organizations take the latter approach -- fund something for long enough to get results... not hand everyone enough money for a week's work and say "okay! We're done!" Same with pharmaceutical companies.

reply to post by Byrd


I truly hope there is only innocence behind the passing over for funds in this case.....
I just am aware through this forum and other reading that their has been evidence spanning decades that has shown a calculated misdirection of funds. Also attacks on physicians, scientists, and others whose novel therapies threaten to derail the money train.
At least this got funded and the results are out in the hands of the public now!
I appreciate your well written and amicable point of view on the subject!

interesting thread.
(new here)
how do u flag a thread?
thxs

reply to post by catman33


At the top where it lists how many flags a thread has gotten there is a button to the right that says flag it.
This is an interesting topic and one I feel passionately about as someone getting involved in the field of medicine.