Scientists Cure Cancer: But No One Takes Notice

**Oneironaut Zero** · 02-05-2007 02:35 PM

This was a bulletin that a friend of mine had posted on myspace. After reading it I started looking around for other info on it and came across a link from New Scientist.

Bulletin:
================================================== =================

Scientists cure cancer, but no one takes notice
David McRaney
Issue date: 1/23/07 Section: Opinion

* Print
* Email
* Article Tools

*
Page 1 of 1

Scientists cured cancer last week.

Yep.

So, why hasn't the media picked up on it?

Here's the deal. Researchers at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada found a cheap and easy to produce drug that kills almost all cancers. The drug is dichloroacetate, and since it is already used to treat metabolic disorders, we know it should be no problem to use it for other purposes.

Doesn't this sound like the kind of news you see on the front page of every paper?

The drug also has no patent, which means it could be produced for bargain basement prices in comparison to what drug companies research and develop.

Scientists tested DCA on human cells cultured outside the body where it killed lung, breast and brain cancer cells, but left healthy cells alone. Rats plump with tumors shrank when they were fed water supplemented with DCA.

Again, this seems like it should be at the top of the nightly news, right?

Cancer cells don't use the little power stations found in most human cells - the mitochondria. Instead, they use glycolysis, which is less effective and more wasteful.

Doctors have long believed the reason for this is because the mitochondria were damaged somehow. But, it turns out the mitochondria were just dormant, and DCA starts them back up again.

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.

Here's the big catch. Pharmaceutical companies probably won't invest in research into DCA because they won't profit from it. It's easy to make, unpatented and could be added to drinking water. Imagine, Gatorade with cancer control.

So, the groundwork will have to be done at universities and independently funded laboratories. But, how are they supposed to drum up support if the media aren't even talking about it?

All I can do is write this and hope Google News picks it up. In the meantime, tell everyone you know and do your own research.

This is a column of opinion written by Printz Executive Editor David McRaney. Comments can be sent to [email protected]

================================================== ===================

New Scientist link:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1097...st-cancers.html

**Neruo** · 02-05-2007 02:50 PM

If all that is true, and the medical world doesn't change to using nothing but that within a year, it just proves the medical, especially pharmaceutical world is just rotten.

**Universal Mind** · 02-05-2007 09:48 PM

The media would be all over that if it were true. It's not even possible to have a bigger news story than that, short of a nuclear war. Elvis showing up at the Grammy's would get less news attention.

**bradybaker** · 02-05-2007 11:36 PM

Maybe the media is finally smartening up? There have been countless news stories over the past 30 years declaring incredibly new and effective cancer treatments...all have of course turned out to be false, or at least grand exaggerations.

**OneRyt** · 02-05-2007 11:46 PM

Originally Posted by bradybaker

Maybe the media is finally smartening up? There have been countless news stories over the past 30 years declaring incredibly new and effective cancer treatments...all have of course turned out to be false, or at least grand exaggerations.
[/b]

Pump some addictive substance into a Gatorade like drink and ship it to stores internationally! We'll get everyone addicted to the cure for cancer!

**Oneironaut Zero** · 02-06-2007 12:42 AM

http://www.depmed.ualberta.ca/dca/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dichloroaceta...er_applications

http://www.physorg.com/printnews.php?newsid=88194392

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_%28journal%29

http://www.economist.com/science/PrinterFr...tory_id=8548706

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...70116/20070116/
About ctv, for those that want background.

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/st...62-7ed60584b88a

Originally Posted by Universal

The media would be all over that if it were true.
[/b]

What else ya got?

**NeAvO** · 02-06-2007 01:47 AM

I hope thats true and they ship it out to pharmacies, think of all the millions of lives it would save.

**Never** · 02-06-2007 03:06 PM

All businesses especially in a capitalist society are not honest when profit is the primary reason for it's existence. Cancer is a business, and one of the biggest. Whether or not this article is true is irrelevant really. It is still right in the fact that there IS a cure for cancer, and that's doing the opposite of everything they want you to; like eating right and avoiding doctors. Your immune system kills cancer everyday. I find it VERY odd that the first thing they do to you in treatment is utterly destroy your one defense against cancer, and then send you to the lobby to eat at the built in Mcdonalds at the base of the elevator.

**SKA** · 02-06-2007 04:09 PM

What a shame to see even such important issues are Controlled by Businessmen with out moral who only live for profit. They value Profit over Human lives. Corporate snakes they are. Of course little surpirse: I'd expected nothing better from these people.

I'm sure that there won't be any European Government either that will put this Medication on the Market: They're just as Profit-crazed as Any other western Nation.

Oh and those amongst us that keep thinking and saying: ''This CAN'T be true, The media would have long swarmed and covered the story if it were. It's probably a hoax...'' have too much trust in the Profit based Government and it's rich upperclass sponsors. They're only interrested in Furnishing their homes with 6 Italian leather coutches, 5 extra design saloontables to match the 4 they allready have and a 4th Big fat custom made Mercedes Car to Match their collection of Vehicles. THIS is the only thing these people, who are way too much in control of society, government and healthcare...etc care about. They don't give a Damn for cancer patients dying unless they can make profit from them by selling an expensive cure to them.
Marketing, to my great dispair, makes the World go Round.
You better believe it. Do you think the people that control Pharmaceutical companies and ESPECIALLY their upperclass sponsors and investers CARE about people dying from Cancer when they can't profit from the sale of this Medication? No they only care about Profit. You better believe it.

**Burns** · 02-06-2007 04:34 PM

Pharmaceutical companies probably won't invest in research into DCA because they won't profit from it.[/b]

I guess I don't see how pharmaceutical companies wouldn't profit from this. EVERYONE would want to buy this drug (especially if it works like they say it does). The FDA could patent and tax it and make a killing. There are sooo many people out there that would buy this drug, no matter how expensive it was.

Originally Posted by bradybaker

Maybe the media is finally smartening up? There have been countless news stories over the past 30 years declaring incredibly new and effective cancer treatments...all have of course turned out to be false, or at least grand exaggerations.[/b]

Yeah maybe that explains how quiet this has all been. Maybe they want to do more testing before the media takes off and announces to the world (again) that we've cured cancer, just in case it's not as effective as they first thought.

I dunno, I read about this a few days ago and I was amazed that it wasn't headline news. So there's gotta be more to it than we know.

**SKA** · 02-06-2007 05:20 PM

Well there's no doubt in my mind about the intentions of businessmen: Mainly profit for themselves.

However I havent't read enough about this DCA drug to be able to form a proper opinion on it yet. I'll first start reading more about this. My mom was sceptical and said I should ask a Doctor to find out. But who sais that Doctors themselves are provided with the RIGHT info? For now the sources I found on this topic are quite subjective. I also read that it can CAUSE cancer in Mice, while in the SAME source it's also claimed that it cures Cancer in rats and mice.

Quite confusing, but nevertheless interresting and important to get to the bottom of this.

**Universal Mind** · 02-06-2007 10:08 PM

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

http://www.depmed.ualberta.ca/dca/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dichloroaceta...er_applications

http://www.physorg.com/printnews.php?newsid=88194392

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_%28journal%29

http://www.economist.com/science/PrinterFr...tory_id=8548706

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...70116/20070116/
About ctv, for those that want background.

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/st...62-7ed60584b88a
What else ya got?

[/b]

A few obscure sources saying what has been "reported" by the researchers at the university does not quite rise to the level of Elvis at the Grammy's and so forth. What else ya got?

But hypothetically, it would be great if there really were a cure for cancer. When there is, it will be the biggest news story of all time.

**Oneironaut Zero** · 02-07-2007 12:24 AM

Originally Posted by Universal

A few obscure sources saying what has been "reported" by the researchers at the university does not quite rise to the level of Elvis at the Grammy's and so forth. What else ya got?

[/b]

You know, UM, I'd hate to think that you made this kind of statement without actually reading over the links posted. I'm not going to speculate, though. Just know that I hold you to a higher regard than to expect something like that.

First of all, your Elvis at the Grammy's analogy is completely overboard, in this scenario. Why? Not because of the subject we're talking about, but because you are basing your apparent stance of "it's not true" behind the assumption that you know what the media would be doing, were this true. To me, that's like saying that "if x was a cop, he definitely would have arrested y, if y had really committed a crime."

Neither "point" is anything but speculation - a faith that things, inherently, run the way they are supposed to run, or are advertised to run, at all times, and neither "point" stands up to anything verifiable presented as evidence to the contrary. If you're going to use rhetoric to explain why this story is false, at least with me, you should definitely shoot a little higher.

The first link from the University of Alberta website. An obscure source? I suppose that all hinges on your definition of "obscure." The link itself is asking for donations, which I'm simply considering wouldn't be necessary, had they sufficient funding.
The second is DCA on wikipedia, having not much to do with the "conspiracy theory" itself, is more to cross-reference the validity of DCA being used against cancer cells. Just going through the motions to verify as much of the story as possible, as I go.
The third was another link about the same story, to check from another source, bypassing whatever search engine hits seemed to be centered around conspiracy theory content.
The fourth is the wikipedia entry about the creators of the previous link, to reference their credibility, which looks pretty good, to me.
Fifth was just another site that at least seemed somewhat credible, though I can't vouche for them, too much, that did a story on the cancer applications for DCA.
Sixth was CTV. If there is something about the site that implies it's not a credible source, let me know, and I'll disregard the link, completely. (And to help, number seven is a link to their background info.)
The last one is pretty much self-explanatory.

What is obscure about the links posted? What do you think I was proposing to do with them - prove that this scandal is really happening? Nah, man. This whole thing may be bullshit, as far as I'm concerned. This is simply evidence - corraborating (sp) different parts of the story, without passing premature judgement. So far, you've considered the whole thing false on the a priori grounds of "if this was true, the media would be all over it." Not exactly the scientific approach, eh?

But look at it this way, no one is saying (except for the title of the "student's" post, which I simply copied and was, agreeably, over-the-top) that the cure has been found. All articles involved (including those in the links I posted) say that DCA is showing promise in experimentation. That's all. The story is about the lack of funding needed to determine whether or not it is a cure.

**Wolffe** · 02-07-2007 12:50 AM

I think the reason it hasnt been lept all over is that there have been many things that people have said 'Oh look, this will probably cure cancer!' before actual tests on humans, but have then failed, that people aren't leaping to it instantly. Sounds promising though;

Cancer cells also use glycolysis rather than oxidation, and have defective mitochondria. The body often kills damaged cells by apoptosis, a mechanism of self-destruction that involves mitochondria, but this mechanism fails in cancer cells. Michelakis at the University of Alberta[5] hypothesized that dichloroacetate, by restoring mitochondrial function, may restore apoptosis and kill cancer cells. He found that this did happen in breast, brain, and lung cancer cell lines grown in laboratory culture. Dichloroacetate also shrunk human tumors grown in rats, while leaving healthy cells unharmed.[6][7] Dichoroacetate has not been used for cancer in humans, but Michelakis expects clinical trials to start in two years[/b]

**Elwood** · 02-07-2007 12:57 AM

I guarantee that scientists have made cures for cancer before now. Companies dont want to lose money. That is a FACT. If a cure for cancer was made a company would buy the patent and not distribute the product on purpose. Because if one pill that cures cancer completely would be 1000 times cheaper than kemo ect. Pharmaceutical companies are very very corrupt.

**spoon** · 02-07-2007 01:56 AM

Have they published a paper on it yet? I looked on pubmed but didn't find anything definitive.

**Oneironaut Zero** · 02-07-2007 02:24 AM

Hmmm.
I checked on the Cancer Cell journal website, which is where the articles say the paper was published, but I can't really read the articles without a subscription. I typed in "dichloroacetate" and got this search page. Down at the bottom, there's a hit that says "Patent Alert" but, still, I can't access the text without a subscription. =/

I'm still looking, though.

**Universal Mind** · 02-07-2007 09:42 AM

There is a cure for AIDS. Scientists at Mississippi State University need more funding to prove it. I don't think there will be much talk abou it.

In other news, Jim Morrison and John Lennon were arrested for stealing money from Kurt Cobain of the University of Alberta. The major news organizations refused to comment.

But really, if there is a cure for cancer, that's awesome. I hope it's true. I just would bet my left leg up against one dollar that there ends up being nothing to it.

**mystqjaq** · 02-18-2007 08:34 AM

Originally Posted by Wolffe

I think the reason it hasnt been lept all over is that there have been many things that people have said 'Oh look, this will probably cure cancer!' before actual tests on humans, but have then failed, that people aren't leaping to it instantly. Sounds promising though;
[/b]

Bingo. The drug has evidently been tested on rats and strains of cancer cells, but not on humans. So the mental image of the cure for cancer sitting, tested and ready, in Rx bottles just waiting to be shipped to pharmacies is just a little premature.

**Neruo** · 02-18-2007 04:24 PM

Originally Posted by Universal

There is a cure for AIDS. Scientists at Mississippi State University need more funding to prove it. I don't think there will be much talk abou it.
[/b]

Yeah I heard they found a certain part on the HIV-virus that doesn't mutate as much so a drug will actually work correctly against it.

I find it strange that such things aren't well known. A couple of billion, or just a few hundred million, nothing on the great scale of cost of war and farming subsidization, and research could go swift and millions of people would be saved.

But hey, those people live in AFRICA.

**13redfan** · 02-27-2007 11:54 AM

Originally Posted by Neruo

Yeah I heard they found a certain part on the HIV-virus that doesn't mutate as much so a drug will actually work correctly against it.

I find it strange that such things aren't well known. A couple of billion, or just a few hundred million, nothing on the great scale of cost of war and farming subsidization, and research could go swift and millions of people would be saved.

But hey, those people live in AFRICA.
[/b]

OH MY GOD!!! AFRICA!!! AAAAAHHHHH!!!!! HIV infected, disease ridden, starving guttural tribes people! AAARRRGGHHH!

I live in Africa.

**Wolffe** · 02-27-2007 12:18 PM

Originally Posted by 13redfan

OH MY GOD!!! AFRICA!!! AAAAAHHHHH!!!!! HIV infected, disease ridden, starving guttural tribes people! AAARRRGGHHH!

I live in Africa.
[/b]

I think that was the point! They can't make money out of Africa, so they don't bother. Maybe they're waiting for it to become worse in the west where they can then swoop in and make huge amounts of money or something.

**13redfan** · 02-27-2007 12:29 PM

Originally Posted by Wolffe

I think that was the point! They can't make money out of Africa, so they don't bother. Maybe they're waiting for it to become worse in the west where they can then swoop in and make huge amounts of money or something.
[/b]

Very true. They should have a GNU foundation for these sorts of things. Like, opensource world saving cures and ideas

**Neruo** · 02-27-2007 12:46 PM

Originally Posted by 13redfan

OH MY GOD!!! AFRICA!!! AAAAAHHHHH!!!!! HIV infected, disease ridden, starving guttural tribes people! AAARRRGGHHH!

I live in Africa.
[/b]

OH MY GOD?!?!?!?! ARE YOU EXTREMELY POOR, BLACK, BADLY EDUCATED AND HIV INFECTED LIKE MILLIONS AND MILLIONS?!?!?!?!?!?!?! ?1?

No?

Then STFU plz.

**13redfan** · 02-27-2007 12:54 PM

Originally Posted by Neruo

OH MY GOD?!?!?!?! ARE YOU EXTREMELY POOR, BLACK, BADLY EDUCATED AND HIV INFECTED LIKE MILLIONS AND MILLIONS?!?!?!?!?!?!?! ?1?

No?

Then STFU plz.
[/b]

Exactly what does being black have to do with it?

Thread: Scientists Cure Cancer: But No One Takes Notice

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Display

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions