Canadian Scientists Cure Cancer... No One Notices?

[2ndblackjedi]

I just read this article earlier today. I wasn't entirely sure it was legit. I guess part of me is really hoping it isn't true.

You're hoping it isn't true that there's a cure for cancer readily and cheaply available?

OT: Holy fuck. Hope that isn't a hoax. I also hope that every single one of pharmaceutical companies dies in a fucking fire if it's true.

I meant i'm hoping it isn't true that the only reason pharmaceutical companies aren't interested is because money can't be made.

 

[Vrach]

I just read this article earlier today. I wasn't entirely sure it was legit. I guess part of me is really hoping it isn't true.

You're hoping it isn't true that there's a cure for cancer readily and cheaply available?

OT: Holy fuck. Hope that isn't a hoax. I also hope that every single one of pharmaceutical companies dies in a fucking fire if it's true.

I meant i'm hoping it isn't true that the only reason pharmaceutical companies aren't interested is because money can't be made.

I know, still came across as odd the way you put it, like you didn't want the thing to be true on the whole

So... if this article is years old, how come we don't know if it's legit yet?

 

[2ndblackjedi]

I just read this article earlier today. I wasn't entirely sure it was legit. I guess part of me is really hoping it isn't true.

You're hoping it isn't true that there's a cure for cancer readily and cheaply available?

OT: Holy fuck. Hope that isn't a hoax. I also hope that every single one of pharmaceutical companies dies in a fucking fire if it's true.

I meant i'm hoping it isn't true that the only reason pharmaceutical companies aren't interested is because money can't be made.

I know, still came across as odd the way you put it, like you didn't want the thing to be true on the whole

So... if this article is years old, how come we don't know if it's legit yet?

Yeah I think I'll edit my post

 

[GWarface]

Nothing new here, sadly..

The cancer cure has been know for many many years now, it has just been kept from the public..

Why? Well, because cancer=cash.. Same goes with every other sickness and disease...

 

[DRSH1989]

I don't believe it... but if it's true & I'm just an ignorant, it's no wonder this world is falling apart.

 

[GraveeKing]

I think the fact it's not been picked up for a few years makes it even worse - they cured cancer a few years ago and we completely ignore it because it's 'not profitable' ?!
This really does perfectly represent the world we live in today doesn't it?
We cure something life-threatening but the second we realize we don't gain anything it's just shrugged off and ignored - It really should speak for itself, if I were to say I've once again completely lost faith in humanity.
I saw similar to do with a shock-wave based engine or something which would (if engineered into a car) make it hugely more fuel efficient, and it was ignored because no car company wanted to implement it into a design simply because fuel would be used so much less in the process they'd lose money.

The problem of old used to be 'breaking the old ways' like religion, stubbornness and other arrogant things - nowadays the only thing holding back progress is the need to make a profit, it's completely pathetic and really sickens me. The entire thing in itself is an entire threads rant worth.

 

[gellert1984]

we're going to need a better source.

Wish Granted!
http://www.dca.med.ualberta.ca/Home/Updates/2007-03-15_Update.cfm
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19526171.600
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/article736333.ece
http://www.archives.expressnews.ualberta.ca/article/2007/01/8153.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/opinion/01moss.html

Basically; DCA does something to the damaged mitochrondria in some cancer cells that causes them to self destruct/metabolise (however you want to put it). Its not a cure but it does limit and possibly reduce the size of potentially fatal cancer. Human drugs trials are not underway. Some people have been self-medicating but there are issues with liver failure due to excessive use. Wikipedia is your friend.

 

[Vanguard_Ex]

I just read this article earlier today. I wasn't entirely sure it was legit. I guess part of me is really hoping it isn't true that the only reason pharmaceutical companies aren't interested in this is because money can't be made.

It can't be. Think of all the pharmaceutical companies worldwide, would every single one of them really ignore it? Especially when cancer affects so many peoples' lives.

 

[uc.asc]

I just read this article earlier today. I wasn't entirely sure it was legit. I guess part of me is really hoping it isn't true.

You're hoping it isn't true that there's a cure for cancer readily and cheaply available?

OT: Holy fuck. Hope that isn't a hoax. I also hope that every single one of pharmaceutical companies dies in a fucking fire if it's true.

I meant i'm hoping it isn't true that the only reason pharmaceutical companies aren't interested is because money can't be made.

I know, still came across as odd the way you put it, like you didn't want the thing to be true on the whole

So... if this article is years old, how come we don't know if it's legit yet?

We do know, you just didn't read through the comments. I'll summarize: It's not a cure, results so far indicate that it is probably useful in some cases, and clinical trials are (or have been) ongoing.

 

[Jabberwock xeno]

..wha?

Somone better send this shit to news agencry's.

 

[Naeras]

I'm on my second term studying molecular biology. The second sentence of the drug description there claimed mitochondria are cells. Which they're not. They're organelles in cells.

That article is bullshit for that lone reason.

 

[AmosMoses]

Don't want to get on my high horse but I do know a thing or two about the function of mitochondria etc. What is quoted here makes some degree of sense as mitochondria do have a clear role in the initiation of apoptosis (programmed cell death).

However, this is clearly not written by anyone directly working in the field so I take it with a rather large pinch of salt. Actually about a truck full of salt.

 

[CosmicCommander]

And people wonder why I rail on about what a sick fucked up system privatized healthcare is. In a socialized healthcare system, where people come ahead of money, we'd have jumped all over this. Too bad we'd rather make money by holding people's own lives hostage until they fork up the dough for a treatment.

Ah, it's good to see people using a sensationalist, truth-less article as a springboard for their ideology.

OT: Oh God, another excuse for the "PRIVATE HEALTH IS BAAAD... THEY KILL PEOPLE" crowd to jump up. Article's truthfulness aside, the actions of the healthcare companies doesn't add up. If a Company has a chance for a product that they know will sell well, they'll sell it. It's called a business.

If they don't capitalize on this, it's not that they are being horrible people, it's that the drug won't sell. Simple.

 

[similar.squirrel]

Mitochondria are organelles, not cells. They haven't been organisms proper for a long time, if you subscribe to the endosymbiotic origin story.

 

[GeorgW]

I'm not really surprised, you should know how many amazing energy sources are being held back. Soo, yeah, fuck capitalism I guess?

 

[Adam Galli]

Okay, my BS monitors are going off here. Mitochondria are a structure within the cell, not a type of cell. Further, they're essentially the powerplant of the cell; if cancer patients had non-functioning mitochondria, they'd be dead long before the cancer did anything. I'm going to have to see a more reliable source on this before I believe anything.

I'm gonna have to agree with you on this.

 

[w00tage]

I don't know about the veracity of this method, but I do know that we have known about true regeneration in mammals (mice) for a long time, and the ridiculous excuse for a scientific system we have just did - nothing with it. Advancements in science can't be left to whoever thinks there's profit in it.

Linkys to the original paper and one of the many reports on this now (finally) surfacing. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11493713
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4888080.stm

 

[Pyro Paul]

The title of the paper and ultimatly the thread should be changed to:

Canadian Scientists Cure Cancer... For mice.

there is a very large degree of diffrence between the biology of mice and the biology of humans.

ontop of this, questions of toxicity are raised. while DCA is considered naturally occuring and non-toxic, it is a whole diffrent ball game when you start introducing concentrated dosages of the compound at regular intervals.

and if i read the study correctly, i would question possible neurotoxicity.

the drugs inhibits thiamine production...
and thiamine is a critical part of brain function.

chronic usage of this compound may lead to irreversable brain damage.

 

[Kukakkau]

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.

Mitochondria - the structure inside the cell that causes glycolysis to occur which is essential in enerygy production. If you kill mitochodria the patient will die faster than the cancer would kill them.

That's like saying oh yeah we can fix your car but you'll not have an engine in it

People, please, stop acting like you know Biology, because half of you don't know two craps of what is written there...

This paper have been proved as fact by the community and many third party supporters are angry about this fact.

Going into third year university level immunology + microbiology - so yes I know about cancer and functions of the cell. This paper is wrong - mitochondria do not posses the ability to directly kill cells, let alone specific ones.

Cancer is just regular cells that can't turn off their division signals and keep proliferating. The only way this idea works is in making less energy available for the cells to divide. But that then means there isn't enough energy available for other essential functions.

They are killing the cancer by malnourishing and putting the patient at risk - that is why it won't be patented

EDIT: Ignore this post it was based of the pretty poor OP source

 

[Quazimofo]

Okay, my BS monitors are going off here. Mitochondria are a structure within the cell, not a type of cell. Further, they're essentially the powerplant of the cell; if cancer patients had non-functioning mitochondria, they'd be dead long before the cancer did anything. I'm going to have to see a more reliable source on this before I believe anything.

perhaps they are referring to the fact that cancer cells have not completely non-functioning mitochondria, but rather malfunctioning mitochondria which do not process the self-destruct command, which causes the cells to grow out of control. i can see what you mean though. makes the article's legitimacy a little iffy.

OT: if this is true, this is goddamn amazing, and even more amazing that companies are so greedy they won't invest in it. makes me loose faith in Capitalism. though, i guess this is just the old saying of power corrupts in action. its too bad, my fellow americans, and indeed the whole world could benefit from this.
what i find odd is that governments haven't invested in this product to produce/distribute it. the american gvt already has 10 tril in debt, im sure some people would be willing to go a bit further to frigging cure cancer! or perhaps they could raise taxes a wee-bit to pay for it. again, i doubt many sane people would complain. ITS CURING CANCER! The Big Scary Disease of our time!

Edit: ok reading through the replies a little more, im realizing how little i know about biology. thought i at least had the basics down, but i guess not. so ignore my incorrect thoughts regarding the mitochondria.