Scientists cure cancer, but no one takes notice

Canadian researchers find a simple cure for cancer, but major pharmaceutical companies are not interested.

Researchers at the University of Alberta, in Edmonton, Canada have cured cancer last week, yet there is a little ripple in the news or in TV. It is a simple technique using very basic drug. The method employs dichloroacetate, which is currently used to treat metabolic disorders. So, there is no concern of side effects or about their long term effects.

This drug doesn't require a patent, so anyone can employ it widely and cheaply compared to the costly cancer drugs produced by major pharmaceutical companies.

Canadian scientists tested this dichloroacetate (DCA) on human's cells; it killed lung, breast and brain cancer cells and left the healthy cells alone. It was tested on Rats inflicted with severe tumors; their cells shrank when they were fed with water supplemented with DCA. The drug is widely available and the technique is easy to use, why the major drug companies are not involved? Or the Media interested in this find?

In human bodies there is a natural cancer fighting human cell, the mitochondria, but they need to be triggered to be effective. Scientists used to think that these mitochondria cells were damaged and thus ineffective against cancer. So they used to focus on glycolysis, which is less effective in curing cancer and more wasteful. The drug manufacturers focused on this glycolysis method to fight cancer. This DCA on the other hand doesn't rely on glycolysis instead on mitochondria; it triggers the mitochondria which in turn fights the cancer cells.

The side effect of this is it also reactivates a process called apoptosis. You see, mitochondria contain an all-too-important self-destruct button that can't be pressed in cancer cells. Without it, tumors grow larger as cells refuse to be extinguished. Fully functioning mitochondria, thanks to DCA, can once again die.

With glycolysis turned off, the body produces less lactic acid, so the bad tissue around cancer cells doesn't break down and seed new tumors.

Pharmaceutical companies are not investing in this research because DCA method cannot be patented, without a patent they can't make money, like they are doing now with their AIDS Patent. Since the pharmaceutical companies won't develop this, the article says other independent laboratories should start producing this drug and do more research to confirm all the above findings and produce drugs. All the groundwork can be done in collaboration with the Universities, who will be glad to assist in such research and can develop an effective drug for curing cancer.

This article wants to raise awareness for this study, hope some independent companies and small startup will pick up this idea and produce these drugs, because the big companies won't touch it for a long time.


http://www.sott.net/articles/show/228583-Scientists-cure-cancer-but-no-one-takes-notice

I do think we're close to finding a cure, and we may even see it in our lifetimes. I recently read an article somewhere, about one of those high school science fairs out in California, and one of the entries took major notice; it was a submission by a girl of Asian descent, and she'd developed a particle that could hook up with and transport chemo drugs right to the cancer cells and bypass all the healthy ones.

Right now, chemo hits everything--all fast-dividing cells, healthy or not, but to target them that way means a major breakthrough in research.

Smart, smart girl, and she'll be going places in her life! One to watch for the future.

A few years ago I saw on the news that they had a cure but because it would only cost $30 nobody was going to sell it. And I don't get this, they say RIGHT on TV that doctors DON'T want us to be cured of cancer, they want us to stay sick with it and die and pay expensive bills every time we turn around for the privilege of dying painfully, but people STILL believe that doctors and pharmaceutical companies care about them and have their interest in heart.

Supernova wrote:A few years ago I saw on the news that they had a cure but because it would only cost $30 nobody was going to sell it. And I don't get this, they say RIGHT on TV that doctors DON'T want us to be cured of cancer, they want us to stay sick with it and die and pay expensive bills every time we turn around for the privilege of dying painfully, but people STILL believe that doctors and pharmaceutical companies care about them and have their interest in heart.

Just think of all the money the doctors will lose if cancer gets cured--unfortunately it all comes down to the almighty dollar, and as long as there's money in it, why mess with a good thing?

After seeing the statements for my own health insurance for the costs of things when I was being treated for cancer, it's no wonder they aren't rushing to eliminate the disease. Just the mastectomy and implants alone cost $43,000, and that's not including chemo, radiation, various scans and exams.

its true... its all about money. a cheap cure for anything will go nowhere! while 50 million americans have no health insurance... and TOO many die from diseases

Seems to me that curing cancer means a loss a billions of dollars in treatments and medications. Perhaps that's why they haven't noticed; maybe it's deliberate.

Shale wrote:I ran this thru Snopes because the attribution was sketchy. Y'know nobody put a 'byline' on it.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/cancercure.asp

It is false. The story is built on cancer research with dichloroacetate in mice that showed promise but not the story of a definite cure as this article implies.

Considering it came from a Science Web Site I am surprised. I don't believe its far fetched though.

Improvements in detection are still in order, too. Because there are cancers that go undetected for too long due. And some are so frighteningly aggressive that, once diagnosed, takes only weeks to consume a life.