Inventor may have breakthrough in killing cancer cells

"In addition, any pharma company would love to have an effective cancer treatment. They would rake in money hand over fist. There is no money to be made on treatments that don’t work and the patients die."

From UPI, July 12, 2006, article 'Cancer drug pipeline on the rise', Katie Siafaca, spokeswoman for New Medicine, a Pro-Drug group, callously states the reason more and more Drug companies are entering research, not for a cure, but for cancer 'treatments'.:

"They did not go after cancer in the old days because it didn't seem like a place where you could make a lot of money," she said.

But that has changed because cancer drugs can now be very expensive, with some costing tens of thousands of dollars per patient, and many patients will receive multiple drugs during the course of their disease.

The use of second- and third-line therapies "has made chemotherapy a very big business because one patient may have three or four different treatments before they expire," Siafaca said.

In addition, a lower rate of efficacy and a higher rate of side effects can often be acceptable in this arena, particularly in advanced cancer patients with no other options. "A lot of drugs all they do is extend life by several months but you can still make money off it," she said.

41 posted on 08/22/2007 10:02:02 PM PDT by Main Street (Stuck in traffic)

I’m not optimistic he is solving the energy crisis AND cancer in his basement.

Why not? Have you seen his basement?

:-)

42 posted on 08/22/2007 10:02:43 PM PDT by Mind-numbed Robot (Not all that needs to be done, needs to be done by the government.)

I know what you mean about there being many different types of cancer but here is the way my feeble understanding of the process works. Iodine has been used as a contrast for x-rays ever since there have been x-rays. The cancer cells absorb the Iodine molecules and when struck by the focused beam at a certain power setting, it destroys the iodine molecule and takes the cancer cell with it. I was told this by someone that worked on the project. I got the long Physicists explanation but that’s what I got from it.

43 posted on 08/23/2007 7:16:57 PM PDT by Boiling point (The Indians had a bad immigration policy and look what happened to them!)

To: Boiling point

If only it was that easy. Usually if it sounds too good to be true, it is. It’s impossible to target things cell by cell basis with external beams of whatever - there’s always the surrounding tissue that gets damaged, and there’s way to many cells. If you miss a few, people still die.

We need a specific protein based marker that knows how to attach itself to a specific cancer cell. It’s very difficult to do. If simple iodine absorption was a solution we’d have had a cure long time ago. There is no easy answer here, and anyone selling one is looking to profit on fantasies.

44 posted on 08/23/2007 7:55:49 PM PDT by farlander (Try not to wear milk bone underwear - it's a dog eat dog financial world)

To: Boiling point

...there is big money in TREATING cancer. Not curing it.

So true. The American Cancer Society would not like this cell zapper.

45 posted on 08/23/2007 8:05:56 PM PDT by groanup (Limited government is the answer. What's the question?)

46 posted on 09/01/2007 9:15:21 PM PDT by Red Badger (ALL that CARBON in ALL that oil & coal was once in the atmospere. We're just putting it back!)

47 posted on 09/01/2007 9:16:52 PM PDT by Red Badger (ALL that CARBON in ALL that oil & coal was once in the atmospere. We're just putting it back!)

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794