the program is meant to find cures for all cancers , maybe there are some immunotherapies that can be applies to many cancer types, but yeah tthere is no 1 cure for everything( unless we magically have nanobots that can seek and destroy cancer cells lol)
When I was doing cancer research in college there was a study where some people found a particle that when exposed to a certain frequency would vibrate and kill cancer cells. So they had a way to deliver the particle to only cancer cells turn up the beat and blast them.
people usually get cancer later in life. If you cure one form of cancer, then chances are pretty good that the next lethal cancer you get will be a different type, treated by a different drug, made by a different pharma.
The big pharma companies are sitting on numerous patents that they wont develop because the manufacturing costs would make them less profitable than what they currently sell.
If you have cancer, you'll probably buy whatever is available to cure that particular type of cancer. If a pharma has a drug that costs $5 to make and can sell for $2,000, then theyre not going to invest a few million to switch to producing something that costs $30 and can sell for $2,000. Doing so would cut profits by 80%.
And if theyre already making "the most effective" drug for your particular type of cancer, they have no reason to make something even better. That would just be making a new drug to compete with their own existing drug. It wouldnt make sense.
The counter point would be that without a profit motive we wouldn't see as much development/productivity. Maybe that's not true for pharmaceuticals. However, it seems like most of the best drugs are created in places with profit motive in place.
This idea that any 1 organization would do this is something people want to believe but is absolutely impossible in practice.
If ANYONE finds a cure, they will become the richest person in history and likely for the next 100 years.
Which one sounds more like what someone greedy would do?:
- taking the entire $250b cancer market instantly for yourself above everyone in the world and investing that in whatever you want, guaranteeing you’ll be the richest person or biggest company in history
Or
taking your $500m-2b every year at the risk of another country/company taking it away from you every single year?
Better yet, imagine being a researcher not even owning the company and deciding to stay on your $70k per year salary instead of being a billionaire… because?
Biochemist here, looks good but the problem will once again be targeting, so you don't hit too much healthy tissue. That's always the crux of cancer treatments, because you don't target a foreign pathogen but the body's own cells. From thata rticle alone, I don't see anything that would help to hit cancer cells harder than other ones, so it'd have to be coupled to a good vector.
(I was doing medical physics for a while) I know with some treatments it banks on the fact that the metabolic activity of cancer cells is higher so it will uptake the agent in higher quantities than normal tissue. So if you need a critical mass of particles to be lethal then you would have to determine the point when the cancer cells have the minimum lethal amount while normal cells have a sub lethal amount. Then using a localized signal to activate the particles. Bob's your uncle.
Hm, unfortunately overexpressing multi-drug exporters is also a pretty common mutation in many cancers, so that would render them pretty invulnerable to this. Plus, even if it works perfectly and only kills high-proliferating cells, it would still hit stem cells just as hard, causing - like many current cytostatic treatments - stem cell depletion, fucking you over in the long run. So it seems like a bog-standard, albeit new approach to me. The afct that you can focus the IR is good, of course, but that only works with pretty solid tumors in the first place, which you can pinpoint.
But, at the same time you have Goldman Sachs holding seminars about whether a cure for cancer will be as profitable as current measures in sustaining care. Hell, hospitals attend those things. Venture capitalists have actually refused to provide money for many promising solutions.
Want proof? Look into dialysis. Huge $$$$ maker. No one. No one is involved in seeking a cure. They are actively making sure cures don't come to market. Same is now happening with cancer.
I literally can't believe this is allowable by my government. How does anyone involved have a clear conscience? How is it not illegal?
Czeachia once summoned the ceo of Marlboro and other brands and asked do u add ingredients to the cigarette to make it even more addictive and toxic his reply well it’s better for czeachia less money you pay your people if they die quicker… case was dismissed
Governments should just summon the heads of all large companies and then execute them and seize their assets. I believe in Czechia the traditional way would be to throw them out of a window.
Similar idea is to send small nano particles that heat up when exposed to certain wavelengths. Basically burn the cancer. Just gotta get them to bind to the cancer cells.
This is cool, and I don't mean to be the standard pedantic, nitpicky Reddit user, but it only works for skin cancer (maybe GI cancers if you can insert the light source close to the tumor.)
Near-IR doesn't penetrate tissue very much, enough to light up surface cancers, but nothing deeper
307
u/kragon80 27d ago
the program is meant to find cures for all cancers , maybe there are some immunotherapies that can be applies to many cancer types, but yeah tthere is no 1 cure for everything( unless we magically have nanobots that can seek and destroy cancer cells lol)