Cancer and the drug companies

[Edbear]

yes and no. A team at the Malaghan have been doing work on Mitochondrial transfer between cells. A previously unknown event. They are pretty famous.
Mitochondria are responsible for energy metabolism, not a natural defence mechanism. (They are called white blood cells.)
You are correct in so far that it is difficult to metabolise without mitochondria so take those out and cells will struggle. However there are normal cells in the body without mitochondria as part of normal structure, they are perfectly capable of conducting their function for around 120 days before wearing out. Look up erythrocyte......

Thanks for that. I will.

[Edbear]

Probably, because I believe economics and political considerations to be a major factor preventing a major trial of high dose vit C BUT I do not subscribe to the theory pharmaceutical companies are conducting some kind of conspiracy to suppress a cure for cancer. In the case of vit C any trial will only be able to test one set of circumstances or at best a limited range of circumstances. To attempt otherwise would remove the elements of control and randomisation which are the hallmarks of the evidence being sought. (remember there are many case studies to support the efficacy of vit C and many which do not, a stage III RCT is the next step)
It is highly unlikely there will ever be a single cure for all cancers given the sheer number and variety of cancers and the inextricable link to our own genetic makeup of those cancers. Hence, it is highly unlikely there is or ever will be a cure to suppress!

Because of what I do, and for no other reason, I happen to know a fair bit about this topic. For the sake of comparison if I were to write down all that I knew in relation to this field compared to what is known in total, my personal understanding would probably be stretched to fill the back of a postage stamp. This does not begin to account for what we do not understand. There are those who detract science because it cannot explain everything, surely that is the point however? Good science recognises there is more to be learned and pursues that knowledge and understanding.
I think it pays to be discerning and look for evidence to support claims. I think it is foolish however to dismiss what we do not fully understand because there is no formally collated evidence yet to hand. There are any number of Nobel Laureates whose seminal work was down to serendipity or the pursuit of nothing more than a hunch!
All scientific medicine was "alternative" until the evidence was collected......

Well put!

What the above posts by Ulsterkiwi also effectively address is just how incredibly ridiculous a blanket statement like "all alternative cancer therapies are bollox" is.

Which I did not say. But of course you're competing with Bogan for the Dimwitted prize.

[Katman]

Which I did not say. But of course you're competing with Bogan for the Dimwitted prize.

Do you accept though that pharmaceutical companies are not investing any effort into researching alternative treatments simply because there is no profit in it for them?

And if you can accept that then it is not too great a leap of the imagination to consider that they may well be hampering the development of alternative treatments that could drastically reduce their profits.

The oil companies have been doing similar for decades.

[bogan]

Well put!



Which I did not say. But of course you're competing with Bogan for the Dimwitted prize.

Nah, you're well out in front of us both for your efforts at meta-misinterpretation . He said/you said <<<< science

[Edbear]

Do you accept though that pharmaceutical companies are not investing any effort into researching alternative treatments simply because there is no profit in it for them?

And if you can accept that then it is not too great a leap of the imagination to consider that they may well be hampering the development of alternative treatments that could drastically reduce their profits.

The oil companies have been doing similar for decades.

Not necessarily, they tend to look at most things, but having to make a buck means that anything they decide to spend millions on has to be commercially viable. It's a shame but nobody has the financial ability to do it for free.

When you consider the processes and legalities they are bound by it would take a very open minded Govt. to agree to fund these trials and developments with no guarantee of any favourable results. It is as Ulsterkiwi says.

[Edbear]

And as an aside, the oil companies do likewise. BP for example is gearing up to take advantage of the developments in hybrid and battery technology but again, it has to be commercially viable.

One of the issues though, is that the petrol engine is still being developed with good gains in economy and emissions so nobody is keen to expend billions before it becomes necessary.

The other problem for Gov't. is that these gains are reducing the tax take from petrol meaning they are looking at other ways to get the necessary dollars for funding. It's a catch 22.

But this is off topic and should have its own thread.

[bogan]

And as an aside, the oil companies do likewise. BP for example is gearing up to take advantage of the developments in hybrid and battery technology but again, it has to be commercially viable.

One of the issues though, is that the petrol engine is still being developed with good gains in economy and emissions so nobody is keen to expend billions before it becomes necessary.

The other problem for Gov't. is that these gains are reducing the tax take from petrol meaning they are looking at other ways to get the necessary dollars for funding. It's a catch 22.

But this is off topic and should have its own thread.

Only because they are being forced to. It was comercially viable 20 years ago, they just decided dino juice was more profitable. Have you see the doco who killed the electric car? The tldr (and that is a shame, as it is an interesting watch) is that it was not the technology, nor production costs, nor customer dissatisfaction.

Govt tax take is easy, the ruc system is designed for exactly that. The biggest problem for govt is energy infrastructure.

[TheDemonLord]

Only because they are being forced to. It was comercially viable 20 years ago, they just decided dino juice was more profitable. Have you see the doco who killed the electric car? The tldr (and that is a shame, as it is an interesting watch) is that it was not the technology, nor production costs, nor customer dissatisfaction.

Govt tax take is easy, the ruc system is designed for exactly that. The biggest problem for govt is energy infrastructure.

Last time I checked - they still are unable to match the range and re-fill/recharge times of a Petrol car - I think even the Tesla's turbo charge (or whatever it is called) system still takes an hour or 2 to reach 90% charge.

(I will admit that its been a while since I read up on it)

[bogan]

Last time I checked - they still are unable to match the range and re-fill/recharge times of a Petrol car - I think even the Tesla's turbo charge (or whatever it is called) system still takes an hour or 2 to reach 90% charge.

(I will admit that its been a while since I read up on it)

This is true, but so many households have multiple cars with one being used solely as a round town commuter, it makes it commercially viable still.

Tesla's battery swap completely fixes the charging problem too, from a tech point anyway.

[Akzle]

thank fuck that money is providing a measure of value here, to determine whats worth researching and for the benefit of...whom?

[scumdog]

It's how he is able to sleep at night with a wee grin of contentment.

I thought it more likely it would be after lots of this:

[Maha]

I thought it more likely it would be after lots of this:

His night night juice?

[yokel]

is the way they research cancer working??

[Edbear]

is the way they research cancer working??

Crap! No Govt. anywhere is suppressing cancer research! Too many have the erroneous simplistic notion that Cancer is like a broken leg. Cancer is an immune system problem with about as many causes as there are people and no one treatment will ever work for all, or even many types. What may knock one type will have no effect on another and may not even work well on someone else with the same type.

Your attitude is like complaining that they haven't found a cure for weeds.

[Katman]

Cancer is an immune system problem.....

One could almost start to wonder whether the prolific use of vaccines and antibiotics might have something to do with people's natural immune systems malfunctioning.