is there really a conspiracy in cancer research/treatment?
461098
I think you might have something there, there is billions of pounds being put into the reseach, this would be lost if a cure was found, seems strange they can cure virtually every other complaint, even to replacing hearts........very suspicious
456814
There isn't a cure, and there may never be.  Some cancers have really good therapies (ie testicular cancer, childhood leukemia).  Some really don't, ie pancreatic, glioblastoma.  Some cancers still kill within 1-2 years, and this hasn't changed in decades.  But many are more treatable now.  AIDS has alot of drugs for treatment, but it's actually hard to prevent people from getting AIDS (vaccines difficulties) or to root out HIV (antiviral difficulties).  All we can do really is keep it from spreading.  Maybe in a few more decades we can do this.  Cancer will always be a problem because you won't know you have it until it's too late, since most people don't do checkups for every type of cancer out there every year.  Maybe in the future we'll have a blood test that can tell if you have any type (or 99% of them) of cancer.  ALot of work is going into that, including some that our lab is doing.  But believe me there is no vast consipracy; but you can make the arguement that potentially life saving drugs are not on the market because the regulatory hurdles are too high or they won't make a profit.  Drugs cost billions to get FDA approved, and unless they are going to benefit alot of people pharma companies aren't going to bother with them.  That's economics, it's not a conspiracy.  If we didn't have such huge requirements then there would be alot more drugs available, and alot more people will die from them.
1031951
Where do these crazy rumours start?  Of course doctors are allowed to divulge this information, why wouldn't they?
52714
There always seems to be a new breakthrough.  Little by little traditional cancer research is gaining ground.  As far as soon?  That would take a major breakthrough.  But look at the rise in technology over  the past 100 years, and then the past decade.  We have not only more educated and then knowledgeable brains working on it, but think about the knowledge that isn't being lost now when someone  in the research field dies.  You don't have to go searching for a book for answers, it's right there on a computer.  Quick access has made knowledge so readily available that the rise in medical technology should continue to spike off the charts.   So, at the rate it's going the past predictions of stating a cure may be found in 50 years could be reduced to "some time soon"er than anyone thought.
47692
Not rumours, actually scientific research conclusions.\nCheck out below web site for discussions & links to what's happening.
168645
Geez, can't you find a beter conspiracy than that?\n\nOr, is it that the complete lack of evidence is only further proof the conspiracy is working?
190182
There are cures out there right now -- sometimes it is surgical and sometimes it is medical.  I don't there will ever be a single cure for cancer -- it is a complex family of diseases. Some cancers hve very good five year survival rates.  Others do not.  Early detection is almost always key.\n\nWe also know that certain things cause cancer in humans.  Not everytime and not with every person.  But if you compare 1,000 cigarette smokers to 1,000 non-smokers (all other factors being equal) you will see a large difference in lung cancer rates.  That is not to say that all smokers get cancer -- but it is to say that if smoking goes down, so do lung cancer rates.  Radon is a similar factor.  Even viruses (certain STDs) are linked with an increased rate of reproductive cancers.  Sun exposure.  Certain foods.\n\nNone of that is secret.  The government suggests avoiding tobacco, eating a health diet, etc.  Early detection also helps a lot.  Breast cancer and prostate cancer especially benefit from early detection.  That is why the government suggest regular screening for these diseases (pab, mammogram, colonoscopy) at certain ages/intervals.\n\nThere is no question that pharma has a large financial stake in the current health care system.  That said, if a company did have the miracle drug they would produce it! \n\nWhy?  That company would have an almost invaluable asset -- one subject to intellectual property protections.  Set on a shelf that is worth nothing to the company.  On the market, it would probably make a company with only that product the most valuable pharma company in the world.\n\nOne has to only look at several recent examples to see how pharma benefits from introducig new drugs -- look at the Cox2 inhibitors.  Or new PPIs that are little different from what will soon enough be available as generic.  They spend buckets of money on R&D and advertising.  That only generates revenue when they have a product to sell.\n\nThe only way the conspiracy theory works is if there is some non-patentable treatment out there that pharma discovered long ago.  And I don't believe that for a second!  Cancer is too complicated for a single cure. And I can't imagine something that couldn't get some intellectual protection.  Information leaks.  These people have families who suffer from these same illnesses.\n\nIn terms of the FDA, federal law does prohibit marketing medicine that has not been proven safe and effective.  One can argue about where we are at in that balancing act.  But the idea is that I can't make my own variety of snake oil (mabe even one containing a carcinogen) and then claiming it cures cancer 100% of the time.\n\nIn terms of presidents, I think Grant died of cancer.\n\nLast point:  if such a product existed, it would likely save the government lots of money.  The federal governmant pays for medicare (including chemo drugs).  The state and federal governments split the costs of medicaid (low income).\n\nSo, this is really nothing more than an urban legend -- a cruel one that makes little sense to me.
1060034
Sometimes treatment doesnt work. It didnt work on my dad, he passed away because of lung cancer.  But it did work for my mom, that is a breast cancer survivor.  So it's not up to us or the doctors who are the lucky ones that get to live.
813757
I, myself, find that it's interesting they're allowed to call it a "cure" for cancer.  According to the article below, in major studies, Herceptin only had a 0.6% reduction rate for breast cancer deaths.  Yet if someone tries to claim that a naturally-occurring herb is a "cure for cancer," they get fined by the pharmaceutical companies and run out of the country.\n\nThis sums up my feelings on the situation pretty well...\n\n"Herceptin proponents claim clinical trials show a 46 percent decrease in recurring breast cancer when the drug is prescribed to late-stage breast cancer patients. That number, of course, is pure marketing propaganda and statistical spin. Consider the facts: One of the main studies being cited in support of Herceptin saw 34 deaths in the control group (2.0% of the participants) and 23 deaths (1.4%) in the group treated with Herceptin. This translates in a 0.6% absolute reduction in deaths. Hardly a miracle, huh? \n\nBut that doesn't stop drug proponents from hailing Herceptin as a bonafide miracle. As Ralph W. Moss explained in a recent critical commentary published in New Scientist magazine (March 4, 2006), one of the main cheerleaders for Herceptin is none other than Hortobagyi, a paid consultant of Genentech, who received somewhere between $10,000 and $100,000 from the drug company. He's one of the proponents who calls Herceptin a "cure." He probably even does it with a straight face. \n\nIs a 0.6% reduction in deaths really such a big deal? The fact is that getting some regular sunshine and engaging in regular physical exercise has a far greater success rate of reducing the risk of recurring breast cancer. In other words, something you can do absolutely free of charge is better than the most advanced, most miraculous breakthrough the pharmaceutical industry has come up with in 30 years."\n\nFrom newstarget.com - read more here: http://www.newstarget.com/019313.html
475857
Yes it is, if you want to find out the truth about cancer treatments go to the site below.
389443
Finding the cure for cancer.
1102219
No, I do not believe there is a cure for cancer.\n\nIt would be impossible for every government in every country to keep this a secret and if it ever came out the goverment would be overthrown in an instant.\n\nMedication for cancer treatment is very expensive and in the UK for instance, the NHS (government) has to pay for this.  Although this is taken from our NI Contributions it would be silly for the government to spend its own money on drugs if there was an ultimate cure.\n\nThere are always going to be new medications that cost more which are not always available to everyone but thats just the way of the world.\n\nMy mother died of cancer last April after beating it twice before and she spent months and months in hospital, costing the NHS and government tens of thousands of pounds so if there was some superdrug they certainly would have saved themselves a few quid by giving it to her.
674757
BullDogg has a good point the ACS is run by drug companies and politicians. They only research useless and costly treatments. To see for yourself read the e-book I have linked to below, chapter 7 is very informative. Nut the whole thing is a must read. You will never want to donate to those organizations again. My dad died of cancer and if this information was used and widely available he would still be alive.
165970
I don't know if I would say that it was a 'cure' for cancer; however, there are studies on various foods and drugs whose results (usually in laboratory mice/rat experiments) show that the animals using them show a lower 'rate' of acquiring the disease.\n\nI think some of this should be taken with a grain of salt when "publicized" by the general media, because there are probably several other factors involved that may skew the results.\n\nThere have also been 'reversals' in certain claims about food that people may have touted as being "good" or "bad" for you; I tend to think this may be due to how we adapt to them over time or perhaps the results from studies were possibly tainted or released too early.\n\nNevertheless, there will probably also be those individuals looking to make a quick buck by trying to cash in on the sale of chocolate; not just because it tastes good, but because of it's potential medical benefits.
1098375
I had breast cancer and recovered using alternative medicine. There are no sure things however, and anyone, conventional or alternative, who promises you a sure cure is not telling you the truth. If you're willing to do your homework and be really, really proactive you will greatly improve your odds.\n\nYou want to make your body so healthy that cancer can't live in it. I put together some resources to help others with cancer, so they can see how many options they really do have, and make up their own minds about what they want to do. \n\nGod bless you, and take heart. While I wouldn't wish cancer on anyone, perhaps you can look on this as a fantastic opportunity for you to heal your life on many levels.
567304
Actually, I've heard the virus was inteentionally released in the first place and there has always been a cure.\n\nCould be just another wild conspiracy theory of course, but who knows?
9206
This is a treatment that is currently outside of the medical mainstream and is not supported by double blind randomized trials looking at five year survival rates (probably the gold standard test for a treatment program).  That said, to my knowledge, it has not been disproven either.  \n\nI am fairly certain the cure rates you are citing  are misleading.  As to the Nobel prize, I am not aware of any prize being awarded on the topic of C-C treatment (or, for that matter, to the primary advocates or inventors of the treatment).\n\nStill it is an interesting treatment concept -- those considering such a treatment should consult with a doctor though to be sure that certain side effects are avoided.\n\nhttp://www.cs.rochester.edu/~nelson/cesium/cesium_therapy.html