Cure for cancer in 10 years?

atpeace7 · New User Joined: 18 Mar 2008 Posts: 7

You may have heard the same thing: We'll have a cure for cancer in 10 years.

I'm in 2 camps here:

CAMP 1: WE WILL HAVE A CURE
I kind of believe this because I've seen my own mother go from 4th stage to remission (either it was the experimental drug or it was the herbs and juice we gave her);

CAMP 2: WE WON'T
None of the oncologists seemed that happy that my mom's cancer went into remission. The UCLA oncologist, in particular, seemed almost upset by this news. Why? He's making $400/hour (he was our 3rd opinion so Medicare wouldn't pay).

Also, remember the PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES do not want a cure. Period. This would wipe out TRILLIONS of dollars from the portfolio. They're similar to the oil companies that bought out the patents for the electric cars in the 1970's and destroyed them.

Also remember that little disease called AIDS? The cocktail AZT has literally wiped out billions of dollars from the medical industry according to a recent article. The Phamaceutical companies don't want to repeat the same mistake.

ANSWER?

We need to set up an INDEPENDENT research company that will ensure we find a cure in 10 years by the government.

I've spoken to one Harvard Medical researcher who says we need about $200 billion to find the final cure.

We've spent close to $500 billion on the Iraq War.

No matter what you think of George W. Bush (I, the idiot, voted for him), you cannot deny the fact that he did literally NOTHING to find a cure for cancer during his 8 years in office.

And neither will Hillary or Barak or McCain. The biggest losers in our country are drawn to politics for some reason and they're destroying any hope we will find a cure. I would rather have the founders of this wonderful website forum be elected President. Seriously.

Anyway, I'm open to all of your thoughts.

God bless you!

pbj11 · Site Admin Joined: 12 May 2007 Posts: 607

I think your post is a politically charged, but some of your points about money are well taken. Pharmaceuticals are big business, there is no denying that.

Maybe you are too young to remember that President Richard Nixon declared war on cancer back in the early '70's, so many Congresses and Presidents have come and gone since then. It is Congress that makes our laws, approves the budget, and provides research funding from the government sector, not the President. He can outline and propose, but ultimately the authority is in other's hands with only the President having veto power.

I don't personally think that it is our government's responsibility to fund cancer research, so I don't get too rattled over funding allocations. We are a capitalist society, not socialist, so the big pharma's or independent organizations should be funding the research. It is a vicious Catch-22 and unfortunately, the people who are struck with cancer are the ones who have paid the price. Don't forget that through this system the survival rate for women/men with breast cancer has gone up to 85% in the last decade or so. Progress is being made, but sadly very slowly for most cancers. Unless you have huge organizations, like breast cancer does, bringing a particular cancer to the public mindset, little can be done. Early detection is still the best chance of survival for any of the cancers.

I still ponder why AID's became the "poster child" of diseases and had so much funding in comparison to other diseases. How that leapfrogged over cancer is beyond me. The death rate is so low for AID's in the United States, when compared with cancer death rates. Maybe AID's was more of a no-brainer to find a cocktail for than cancer.

Far more focus needs to be placed on cancer of ALL types in our country, regardless of where research funding comes from.

The cost of maintaining our freedom and security as a nation is foremost or there won't be any need for cancer cures. Terrorism is as real of a threat as cancer and thanks, but I don't want it in my back yard.
_________________
Husband diagnosed with NSCLC Stage IV. (Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer) Fought & lived 2 1/2 years with multiple lines of treatment.

Post describing our battle: http://cancerforums.net/viewtopic.php?t=7026&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

simplyklb · Posted: Mon May 05, 2008 11:23 am Post subject: Re: Cure for cancer in 10 years?

We should have had a cure for cancer a long time ago. I know that we have made huge advancements but a cure has not been found. I think that the pharmaceutical companies are holding the ball. Those companies make billions and billions of dollars off off cancer patients.

Kristi

pbj11 · Site Admin Joined: 12 May 2007 Posts: 607

It's a shame that we, in all honesty, feel that there could be cures out there and being withheld for monetary gain by the pharmaceutical companies. I'm not sure, but those thoughts sure cross my mind too often also. I want to have a belief in the goodness of human beings and think they are working to find the cure. Still the question marks remain.

God bless us all and, while it is too late for my husband, I keep hope in my heart for my children's generation to have an end to this horrific disease.
_________________
Husband diagnosed with NSCLC Stage IV. (Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer) Fought & lived 2 1/2 years with multiple lines of treatment.

Post describing our battle: http://cancerforums.net/viewtopic.php?t=7026&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

	Cancer Forums Forum Index -> General Cancer topics	All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

A website for discussions about any type of cancer, including lung cancer, breast cancer, mesothelioma, prostate cancer, laryngeal cancer, leukemia, lymphoma, multiple myeloma and others