The cure for Cancer is it about profit

[Sergei]

I remember a show a few years ago (it was either 20/20 or 60 Minutes) where they compared normal versus organic vegetables and found that while there are pesticides on normal foods that required them to be scrubbed to be safe, organic foods carried lethal levels of E.Coli that also required them to be thoroughly washed.

Who was the study funded by?

 

[goodtime]

Has there ever been a case where a significant technological advance was hidden for a long time by a commercial interest, in order to protect their existing business (e.g. like hiding a cancer cure in order to sell drugs)?

How about generic drugs? Many in 3rd world countries & even in N.America would not be dying from Aids. Costs of meds are artifically inflated 'to cover research & Pham companies block generic drugs that can be substitute for some common illness that we take granted.

I know few U.S. seniors doing bus tours to CDN to buy heart & other costly drugs as their State/pressure from Pham companies to choose between meds or living better given their limited Medicare/aid coverage.

 

[Sergei]

They try harder than anything to get ahead of their competion, they would love to cure cancer because of the money they would make.

.....


Has there ever been a case where a significant technological advance was hidden for a long time by a commercial interest, in order to protect their existing business (e.g. like hiding a cancer cure in order to sell drugs)?

......

Wouldn't a supressed cure be a big story? I just can't buy it.

.....

I am surprised that there are so many people here who seriously think that this happens, I would have assumed it was only nut-cases. Maybe it is, you never can tell. Perhaps I will post a poll and see what the overall sentiment of Terb members is.

1) They make more money now than they could ever make with cures. A cure is a one time revenue. Disease management is cash flow until death. How much would they have to charge for a cure to make up for, say, several billion dollars a year of asthma drugs (one specific drug sold over 2 billion Pound Sterling last year) over 40 or 50 years? If they cured 1 million asthmatics in 2007, they'd have to charge them at least 500,000 dollars each to make up for the future value of the revenue stream.

2) In the USA the AMA eliminated all study of natural remedies from the medical schools long before world war 2 (read the book I recommended earlier). That still continues to this day. They control everything taught there. Macmaster Univiversity kicked drug company reps off its campus a few years ago because of the corruption they were spreading. Generally, they attack anything that may hurt sales, not only cures. They attack prevention. And they've succeded in having their products covered by government health plans in most of Europe while natural remedies are MUCH less likely to be covered, making them expensive.

3) A big story in what medium? On the TV channels that receive gagillions from drug manufacturers? Come on.

4) Holding back information is a FACT and not something "nuts" believe in. For example, they know that cholesterol doesn't cause heart disease. The oxidation of cholesterol does. Homocysteine oxidizes cholesterol. They discovered homocysteine many years ago. Why is it not popularized as a main factor in heart disease (along with tryglycerides, also a bigger indicator than cholesterol)? Because they haven't found a DRUG to lower homocysteine. Homocysteine can only be lowered by diet changes, tri-methyl glycine, and B vitamins. Tryglycerides can be lowered by fish oil or consumption of fatty fish and the reduction in the consumption of starches. But they can't patent those. There's no money there. The homocysteine craze will begin as soon as the drug comes out. Think of these words and remember me.

5) I resent your use of the word "nut," since I dropped out of medical school over 15 years ago over the mafia-style medical establishment. Get informed on a topic, THEN decide who is the "nut."

 

[C Dick]

5) I resent your use of the word "nut," since I dropped out of medical school over 15 years ago over the mafia-style medical establishment. Get informed on a topic, THEN decide who is the "nut."

I did not mean to offend you with my reference to nuts. What I was trying to say was that if you had asked me prior to this thread who would believe that the medical establishment would hide cures, I would have said, only nut-cases. But I have been surprised by the number of seemingly rational people here who truly believe that this is occuring, so I am reexamining my position.

 

[C Dick]

1) They make more money now than they could ever make with cures. A cure is a one time revenue. Disease management is cash flow until death. How much would they have to charge for a cure to make up for, say, several billion dollars a year of asthma drugs (one specific drug sold over 2 billion Pound Sterling last year) over 40 or 50 years? If they cured 1 million asthmatics in 2007, they'd have to charge them at least 500,000 dollars each to make up for the future value of the revenue stream.

I think that you are not considering the effect of competition in the marketplace. Not every big drug company has a patented asthma remedy, it is the ones who don't who would be most likely to develop the asthma cure, because they can then destroy the market for treatments, and make a pile of money quickly.

2) In the USA the AMA eliminated all study of natural remedies from the medical schools long before world war 2 (read the book I recommended earlier). That still continues to this day. They control everything taught there. Macmaster Univiversity kicked drug company reps off its campus a few years ago because of the corruption they were spreading. Generally, they attack anything that may hurt sales, not only cures. They attack prevention. And they've succeded in having their products covered by government health plans in most of Europe while natural remedies are MUCH less likely to be covered, making them expensive..

So then why wouldn't MacMaster researchers be looking for cures? For the information hiding theory to work, all players with the potential knowledge have to be in on the scam, which is what makes it hard for me to buy.

4) Holding back information is a FACT and not something "nuts" believe in. For example, they know that cholesterol doesn't cause heart disease. The oxidation of cholesterol does. Homocysteine oxidizes cholesterol. They discovered homocysteine many years ago. Why is it not popularized as a main factor in heart disease (along with tryglycerides, also a bigger indicator than cholesterol)? Because they haven't found a DRUG to lower homocysteine. Homocysteine can only be lowered by diet changes, tri-methyl glycine, and B vitamins. Tryglycerides can be lowered by fish oil or consumption of fatty fish and the reduction in the consumption of starches. But they can't patent those. There's no money there. The homocysteine craze will begin as soon as the drug comes out. Think of these words and remember me.

Whereas in a non-corrupt world, what would happen? If there is no drug for homocysteine, what would they be doing? That the drug companies do not admit that the cholesterol drugs do not work is not surprising to me, they are evil. And I do not see that as information hiding. Information hiding would be if they had a one-time cure that fixed your homocysteine, and thus your cholesterol, but they kept it secret to keep working on the cholesterol, knowing it was pointless. I see no evidence of this.

 

[C Dick]

How about generic drugs? Many in 3rd world countries & even in N.America would not be dying from Aids. Costs of meds are artifically inflated 'to cover research & Pham companies block generic drugs that can be substitute for some common illness that we take granted.

I know few U.S. seniors doing bus tours to CDN to buy heart & other costly drugs as their State/pressure from Pham companies to choose between meds or living better given their limited Medicare/aid coverage.

Do you really see covering research costs as "artificially inflating" the prices. Generally speaking, the return on investment of drug companies is in-line with other companies, so they are simply covering their costs. If you had no patent protection, all drug research would be government funded. Perhaps that is what you people want?

Generic drugs are not secret, you can not expect the patent holder to sell the generic version, then they are basically selling below full cost.

Information hiding would be if they had an AIDS cure, but kept it hidden to sell more treatments. Personally, I do not believe this is possible.

 

[goodtime]

Covering costs? Look closely at their financial reports. Big Pharmas are building new fancy Corp h/q in GTA.

My point Pharma's priority is their bottom line, saving lives is not it. Cure disase is not profitable. As indicated by others, disase management is more profitable.

It's not so much cover-up but block or don't promote what's not profitable to them.

It's late. I'm not going to bother to search for link to the $200/cancer tablet. I do have this link http://www.slate.com/id/2102844/

JP morgan is sponsoring 1 of the biggest Pharma convference this week. Check with your MD, drug companies often wine, dine buy gifts for MD that use their drugs.

Big Pharmas are essentially barring Generic drugs typing up patent disputes with their $$$. Meanwhile people dying in 3rd world country, not getting simple HIV+ management drugs. You're right, it's not a cure but it will prolong life for those infected.

Full cost? Pharma lobbying deserves an A in Ad campaign. Big scandals in '04? experts take $$$ to skew tests & reviews. They pretty much sway what gets publish in JAMA & the likes. MD that speaks out otherwise are looking at career sucide.

It doesn't matter if you're convice or not. They're big, powerful & manipulative. I know I won't count on any miracle drugs or breakthru research from them in my lifetime.

 

[skrumpy]

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

I usually don't post any details of my personal life on this community, but in this case I feel I have to speak out.

I've dedicated the past 10 years of my life studying 1 very particular type of cancer. I've collaborated with a few dozen other researchers across the glob e that are all experts on the same type of cancer. If any one of us came up with a breakthrough we'd be popping open the champagne and emailing everybody we knew.

Yes, it is true that there is a strong lobby pharm. lobby, and it is true that big business is very closely tied with the research field. Those facts are true, however you are forgetting that the actual people on the front lines doing the actual RESEARCH are all idealistic dreamers.

You may poo-poo their lines of research and question why they don't test things like, orange juice, flax seed, or your grandma's special mixture of spider's silk and cat urine. I'll give you an answer why they don't. None of that BS works.

There's something called the scientific method. Every once in awhile a researcher will give some of these fringe remedies a decent shot, and inevitably it fails to live up to the hype. There is no malevolent corporate man directing the research, there are no coverups. The fact is, those lunatic fringe cures just don't work. Have some faith in those that have dedicated their lives to research.

For all of you who think it impossible that a researcher would give away a miraculous discovery that changes the lives of millions. I ask that you do some reading on Charles Best and Frederick Banting.

Summary: There is no cover-up. We all want to cure cancer. There's plenty of other diseases that will continue to fuck us long after cancer is history.

edit for spelling and grammatical errors - I'm running on very little sleep

 

[train]

Covering costs? Look closely at their financial reports. Big Pharmas are building new fancy Corp h/q in GTA.

My point Pharma's priority is their bottom line, saving lives is not it. Cure disase is not profitable. As indicated by others, disase management is more profitable.

.

Disagree. The only way to manage their bottom lines over the long term is to develop and provide drugs and medical devices that are effective and save lives.

Unless you are only 10 years old you have already lived long enough to see many miracle drugs ( AIDS medications just to name one) and breakthrough research that saves lives.

 

[danmand]

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

I usually don't post any details of my personal life on this community, but in this case I feel I have to speak out.

I've dedicated the past 10 years of my life studying 1 very particular type of cancer. I've collaborated with a few dozen other researchers across the glob e that are all experts on the same type of cancer. If any one of us came up with a breakthrough we'd be popping open the champagne and emailing everybody we knew.

Yes, it is true that there is a strong lobby pharm. lobby, and it is true that big business is very closely tied with the research field. Those facts are true, however you are forgetting that the actual people on the front lines doing the actual RESEARCH are all idealistic dreamers.

You may poo-poo their lines of research and question why they don't test things like, orange juice, flax seed, or your grandma's special mixture of spider's silk and cat urine. I'll give you an answer why they don't. None of that BS works.

There's something called the scientific method. Every once in awhile a researcher will give some of these fringe remedies a decent shot, and inevitably it fails to live up to the hype. There is no malevolent corporate man directing the research, there are no coverups. The fact is, those lunatic fringe cures just don't work. Have some faith in those that have dedicated their lives to research.

For all of you who think it impossible that a researcher would give away a miraculous discovery that changes the lives of millions. I ask that you do some reading on Charles Best and Frederick Banting.

Summary: There is no cover-up. We all want to cure cancer. There's plenty of other diseases that will continue to fuck us long after cancer is history.

edit for spelling and grammatical errors - I'm running on very little sleep

Thanks for posting and revealing a little about your life. And keep up the good work.

I think that you will agree that when it comes to preventing illnesses including cancers, there are a variety of foods or food supplements that have positive effects. And a variety of foods and supplements (tobacco for example) that have negative effects.

I have two books, that seem to look at foods and food supplements in a sober and scientific way:

1. Mayo clinic Book of alternative medicine

2. Richard Beliveau and Dennis Gingras: " Foods that fight cancer"

Do you agree?

 

[skrumpy]

Thanks for posting and revealing a little about your life. And keep up the good work.

I think that you will agree that when it comes to preventing illnesses including cancers, there are a variety of foods or food supplements that have positive effects. And a variety of foods and supplements (tobacco for example) that have negative effects.

I have two books, that seem to look at foods and food supplements in a sober and scientific way:

1. Mayo clinic of alternative medicine

2. Richard Beliveau and Dennis Gingras: " Foods that fight cancer"

Do you agree?

I most definitely agree. Eating a well-balanced and healthy diet can greatly decrease the odds of cancer. I only have a problem with the folks that claim outrageous things; such as - eating 20 cloves of garlic a day will cure cancer.

 

[Meister]

or your grandma's special mixture of spider's silk and cat urine.

too funny!


thanks for the inside view. btw, big pharma are in the business of making a profit and not save lives. However, one of the beauties of western style economies is that if you are selling shit you will be out of business very quickly or get your ass reamed in court. So it is in the best interest for pharma to deliver products that work and help the patient, even save lives. Because if company B brings out the product that will save lives or cure the disease company A, which only has a treatment, will take a big loss. So it is in the best interest for any pharma company to deliver the best possible treatment or cure.

Economics 101

 

[Sergei]

So then why wouldn't MacMaster researchers be looking for cures? For the information hiding theory to work, all players with the potential knowledge have to be in on the scam, which is what makes it hard for me to buy.



Information hiding would be if they had a one-time cure that fixed your homocysteine, and thus your cholesterol, but they kept it secret to keep working on the cholesterol, knowing it was pointless. I see no evidence of this.

I said drug company reps. I didn't say that they stopped receiving money!!!!!!

The evidence is that they promote useless drugs instead of recommending what I said above.

 

[danmand]

thanks for the inside view. btw, big pharma are in the business of making a profit and not save lives. However, one of the beauties of western style economies is that if you are selling shit you will be out of business very quickly or get your ass reamed in court. So it is in the best interest for pharma to deliver products that work and help the patient, even save lives. Because if company B brings out the product that will save lives or cure the disease company A, which only has a treatment, will take a big loss. So it is in the best interest for any pharma company to deliver the best possible treatment or cure.
Economics 101

Without a doubt, the objective of the pharmaceutical companies is to make money for the shareholders (and the managers), and nobody can fault them for that under a capitalistic system as ours.

However, from that also follows that it is vitally important for medical reasearch to be funded by government.

 

[Sergei]

However, from that also follows that it is vitally important for medical reasearch to be funded by government.

Bang on!

As far as the cover-ups (or no cover-ups) go, my final comment is this, because exhausting the issue would exhaust my fingers: PLENTY of cover-ups have gone on over the last DECADES, I have kept a whole file of reports and comments, many from former members of the FDA and the medical establishment, all proving that there have been cover-ups of both good information regarding health and the evil side-effects of drugs, and that anyone who wants to know the truth should do as much research as possible, trust NOBODY and make his own decision.

A few examples:

David Graham, FDA: 140,000 cardiac incidents from Vioxx covered up.

Professor Joan Ramon Laporte: Brings out GOVERNMENT FUNDED study on celecoxib and rofecoxib and calls them a scientific fraud. Merck sues him in the Madrid courts (for telling the true results of his study) in order to keep selling more drugs and hide the truth about the uselessness of the drugs and the evilness of their side-effects. Laporte wins the case.

David Graham, FDA: "The attitude toward publishing the dangerous side-effects of medications is UNFAVOURABLE" in the medical establishment.

David Healy, Univ. of Cardiff: Says that university professors in medical schools sign studies brought to them by pharmaceuticals without even reading them. For $$$$ of course.

Marcia Angell: Editor of the New England Journal of Medicine for 20 years. Wrote a book -The truth about Big Pharmaceuticals and how they DECEIVE us.

And many, many more.

Cover-ups are the norm in the medical industry. Seek and ye shall find, I say!

PS: My point is not necessarily to convice somebody. Just be careful and save yourselves!

 

[C Dick]

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

I usually don't post any details of my personal life on this community, but in this case I feel I have to speak out.

I've dedicated the past 10 years of my life studying 1 very particular type of cancer. I've collaborated with a few dozen other researchers across the glob e that are all experts on the same type of cancer. If any one of us came up with a breakthrough we'd be popping open the champagne and emailing everybody we knew.

Yes, it is true that there is a strong lobby pharm. lobby, and it is true that big business is very closely tied with the research field. Those facts are true, however you are forgetting that the actual people on the front lines doing the actual RESEARCH are all idealistic dreamers.

You may poo-poo their lines of research and question why they don't test things like, orange juice, flax seed, or your grandma's special mixture of spider's silk and cat urine. I'll give you an answer why they don't. None of that BS works.

There's something called the scientific method. Every once in awhile a researcher will give some of these fringe remedies a decent shot, and inevitably it fails to live up to the hype. There is no malevolent corporate man directing the research, there are no coverups. The fact is, those lunatic fringe cures just don't work. Have some faith in those that have dedicated their lives to research.

For all of you who think it impossible that a researcher would give away a miraculous discovery that changes the lives of millions. I ask that you do some reading on Charles Best and Frederick Banting.

Summary: There is no cover-up. We all want to cure cancer. There's plenty of other diseases that will continue to fuck us long after cancer is history.

edit for spelling and grammatical errors - I'm running on very little sleep

These are the points I was trying to make, but I think he expressed it a lot better than I did. The rest of you can stick with your cat urine it it works for you.

 

[goodtime]

The rest of you can stick with your cat urine it it works for you.

FYI, Urine is form of preventive 'cure' from toxin entering body. Been some studies on this but most wouldn't know...

Parasites & Radicals are dirty words to some.

 

[C Dick]

There was an article in yesterday's Globe and Mail that an old existing drug used for rare mitochondrial diseases had been found to be very effective in killing cancer cells in animals and lab dishes. It is promising that it could be effective in people, and since the drug has been around for a long time, it is already known to be safe.

The article pointed out that since it is old, the patent has expired so it is in the public domain, so no drug company if likely to sponsor the research next steps. This latest research was done by a non-profit, and they are going to attempt to do the next steps also.

 

[shakenbake]

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

I usually don't post any details of my personal life on this community, but in this case I feel I have to speak out.

I've dedicated the past 10 years of my life studying 1 very particular type of cancer. I've collaborated with a few dozen other researchers across the glob e that are all experts on the same type of cancer. If any one of us came up with a breakthrough we'd be popping open the champagne and emailing everybody we knew.

Yes, it is true that there is a strong lobby pharm. lobby, and it is true that big business is very closely tied with the research field. Those facts are true, however you are forgetting that the actual people on the front lines doing the actual RESEARCH are all idealistic dreamers.

You may poo-poo their lines of research and question why they don't test things like, orange juice, flax seed, or your grandma's special mixture of spider's silk and cat urine. I'll give you an answer why they don't. None of that BS works.

There's something called the scientific method. Every once in awhile a researcher will give some of these fringe remedies a decent shot, and inevitably it fails to live up to the hype. There is no malevolent corporate man directing the research, there are no coverups. The fact is, those lunatic fringe cures just don't work. Have some faith in those that have dedicated their lives to research.

For all of you who think it impossible that a researcher would give away a miraculous discovery that changes the lives of millions. I ask that you do some reading on Charles Best and Frederick Banting.

Summary: There is no cover-up. We all want to cure cancer. There's plenty of other diseases that will continue to fuck us long after cancer is history.

edit for spelling and grammatical errors - I'm running on very little sleep

yes, very noble of you and them. However, it is the FAT CATS with DEEP POCKETS who call the shots, not the idealists with all the good ambitions in the world. The corruption always comes up the winner, no matter how hard the noble and righteous researchers try to make this a better world.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but that is the harsh reality that I have learned in my more than 30 years of R&D.

 

[goodtime]

Unless you are only 10 years old you have already lived long enough to see many miracle drugs ( AIDS medications just to name one) and breakthrough research that saves lives.

Last time I check, there's no cure.

Cocktails merely allow one to sustain life longer while living with AIDS symptoms. SF health did a large sample size study recently. The effectiveness of the cocktails.

If taking several dozen pills/day, going thru AIDS symptoms & fear from everyday gems are def'n for 'cure', then living needs to be re-def'n.