Cancer research

moneymoneymoney wrote:

Cancer research has got to be the most desired but least sought after job. Unlimited funding for a job that requires zero results. Multitudes of charities throwing donations at you and even more government grants to fund your research.....but NEVER ever questioned where the money is going or has gone. You can work your entire life and NEVER make any headway on a cure. Every few years come up with a new 'clinical trial" drug that has much merit as pickle juice for athletic performance, folks will keep dying but you are still employed and another charity event will raise more money to keep you employed.

Yes, I have cancer with no cure in sight and watch these research MD's come and go to the their offices daily outside my window on the 10th floor. Most of these folks drive Mercedes, BMW and Porsche

Hey, pickle juice has worked wonders for me. Anytime I get an uncontrollable muscle spasm I drink some pickle juice and it subsides

Hey cool I go to uc berkeley too, a fellow berkeley runner on letsrun i didn't know there were any

What blows me away is how rabid everyone is about finding a cure for cancer focusing only on treatment of cancer. We already have a cure: prevention. It is very sad that some people develop cancer for no reason and through no fault of their own, but for most people, cancer is the result of decades of an unhealthy lifestyle. My coworker was just diagnosed with brain cancer at age 53, and all I have been able to think through this whole thing is, "WTF did you think was going to happen?" because she has smoked cigs her entire life and eats nothing but pure crap (chips, donuts, soda is all I ever see her consume), and never exercises whatsoever. Most cases are like this.

Billions and billions of dollars are spent on cancer research, and yet mortality rates have barely changed at all more than 20 years. All we've gotten better at is early detection and extending someone's life from a few months to a few years. That we're still spending so much on cancer research seems ludicrous to me.

survival rates have been steadily increasing. what blows me away is your emotional response completely devoid of facts and out of touch with reality. your complete lack of logic is ludicrous to me."Among adults diagnosed with cancer during the period from 1974 through 1976, the 5-year relative survival rate for all cancers combined was 50%. Among whites, it was 51%; among blacks, it was approximately 40%. During the same period, the 5-year relative survival rate for all childhood cancers combined was about 62%. "Today: "Among adults, the 5-year relative survival rate for all cancers combined is now approximately 68%; among whites, it’s about 69%; among blacks, it’s about 59%. The 5-year relative survival rate for all childhood cancers combined is now approximately 81%."https://report.nih.gov/NIHfactsheets/ViewFactSheet.aspx?csid=75

time for a change wrote:

Put engineers in charge of cancer research programs. Biomedical people have had their chance and largely failed. They have spent more than a half a trillion dollars over 50 years for marginal improvements. The cancer death rate has hardly budged.

In a war on cancer, the cancer has won. It is time to bring in more engineers who are trained to actually solve complex problems instead of just studying them.

Lol this is why most people can't stand engineers. They think they're God's gift to mankind.

Whatever the problem, the FDA is the root of it. If someone discovered a legitimate cure for cancer tomorrow, the FDA would send armed men to shut them down if they began selling it before less than 15 years had passed.

moose wrote:

time for a change wrote:

Put engineers in charge of cancer research programs. Biomedical people have had their chance and largely failed. They have spent more than a half a trillion dollars over 50 years for marginal improvements. The cancer death rate has hardly budged.

In a war on cancer, the cancer has won. It is time to bring in more engineers who are trained to actually solve complex problems instead of just studying them.

Lol this is why most people can't stand engineers. They think they're God's gift to mankind.

OK, keep dying of cancer then. Feel free to keep cutting off your own nose to spite your face. That'll show 'em!

To be doing the same thing over and over again for fifty damned years and expecting different results is utter idiocy.

Oedipus Rexing wrote:

I don't know if I really added anything of value, but I think it's unfair to say that the researchers aren't doing anything.

The issue is not that they aren't doing anything.

The issue is that they aren't doing much of anything.

I have not had time to research the info from this graph but have a question. Why does it show Alzheimer's being identified/introduced in 1980? What a meteoric rise it has taken, how sad. It is easy to sit here and watch my IV drip poison into my vein but the loneliness and sadness for a family dealing with Alzheimer's I feel would be worse.

moneymoneymoney wrote:

I have not had time to research the info from this graph but have a question. Why does it show Alzheimer's being identified/introduced in 1980? What a meteoric rise it has taken, how sad. It is easy to sit here and watch my IV drip poison into my vein but the loneliness and sadness for a family dealing with Alzheimer's I feel would be worse.

Probably much more reported cases as awareness has grown

time for a change wrote:

moose wrote:

Lol this is why most people can't stand engineers. They think they're God's gift to mankind.

OK, keep dying of cancer then. Feel free to keep cutting off your own nose to spite your face. That'll show 'em!

To be doing the same thing over and over again for fifty damned years and expecting different results is utter idiocy.

Cancer research has come a long way in 50 years. It's idiocy to call it a failure.

Engineers have a surface-level understanding of the underlying science.

Chemical engineers are not chemists

Mechanical engineers are not physicists

Bio engineers are not doctors

And you think these people should be put in charge of complex cellular research? That deserves a resounding LOL. An engineer couldn't even begin to describe the instrumentation that's used in cancer research labs.

moneymoneymoney wrote:

Cancer research has got to be the most desired but least sought after job. Unlimited funding for a job that requires zero results. Multitudes of charities throwing donations at you and even more government grants to fund your research.....but NEVER ever questioned where the money is going or has gone. You can work your entire life and NEVER make any headway on a cure. Every few years come up with a new 'clinical trial" drug that has much merit as pickle juice for athletic performance, folks will keep dying but you are still employed and another charity event will raise more money to keep you employed.

Yes, I have cancer with no cure in sight and watch these research MD's come and go to the their offices daily outside my window on the 10th floor. Most of these folks drive Mercedes, BMW and Porsche

Your knowledge of academia is at a toddler's level. Moronic.

I can present data to support each of my points.

I've already supported point 4, so here is support for point 1. Clinical trials often cost well in excess of $50 million. It's almost impossible to overcome this hurdle without the backing of Big Pharma.

Here is support for point 2 from CBS's 60 Minutes. Big Pharma is interested in selling the most expensive drugs possible, often with no advantage over equally effective generic drugs.

There is a lot more supporting data available for each assertion I made. You can find it with a few minutes' searching.

fisky wrote:

Ms. Piggy wrote:

Every point you made is ill-informed and sophomoric. Point 5 also contradicts your points 2 and 3 by suggesting that there are indeed good treatments available.

I can present data to support each of my points.

I've already supported point 4, so here is support for point 1. Clinical trials often cost well in excess of $50 million. It's almost impossible to overcome this hurdle without the backing of Big Pharma.

http://www.centerpointclinicalservices.com/blog-posts/driving-drive-drug-innovation-and-market-access-part-1-clinical-trial-cost-breakdown/

Here is support for point 2 from CBS's 60 Minutes. Big Pharma is interested in selling the most expensive drugs possible, often with no advantage over equally effective generic drugs.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/cost-of-cancer-drugs-60-minutes-lesley-stahl-health-care/

There is a lot more supporting data available for each assertion I made. You can find it with a few minutes' searching.

Neither of those sources prove your point. Yes clinical trials and cancer drugs are expensive. That is not evidence of some FDA/pharma conspiracy. Amazing how you think you're proving a point when in reality you have no idea what you're talking about. You must know you're grasping at straws.

Have other countries cured cancer? Are China, the Scandinavian and other non capitalist countries more successful? We can't always blame big pharma and the FDA for lack of a cure.

The graph is misleading for a couple reasons...

As people live longer with other chronic conditions and diagnosis improves, the rate of cancer increases. Also obesity and poor diet is a major risk factor for cancer and those have markedly increased since 1980.

That being said I can appreciate the layperson's frustration with cancer research...we have made great progress in some cancers (breast) but not in others (pancreas). It takes a lot of research and time for small gains. Said in the worst possible way, cancer research does more for researchers and pharma than for patients.

Unfortunately cancer is exceedingly complex and new treatments will always be laborious as expensive. For every useful treatment, there are 10 others tested that didn't help.

Be Humble wrote:

Neither of those sources prove your point. Yes clinical trials and cancer drugs are expensive. That is not evidence of some FDA/pharma conspiracy. Amazing how you think you're proving a point when in reality you have no idea what you're talking about. You must know you're grasping at straws.

You are misinterpreting what I wrote. Let me try again. There are major obstacles to finding a cure for cancer. These obstacles include major financial disincentives to find cures.

Here's a book that would open your eyes.

The Truth about Drug Companies: How They Deceive Us and What to Do about It, by a woman who spent two decades working for The New England Journal of Medicine. Read it. Or, just stay ignorant and write a snarky response. Your call. I'm betting on the latter, but you would be a much wiser person if you read it.

Somebloke....Lets trade places for a day and see who resorts to "moronic" name calling. Unless you can trump a PHD.....shut up

Whats your explanation for why you've only researched one side of the argument?