This is an archive of the mabination.com forums which were active from 2010 to 2018. You can not register, post or otherwise interact with the site other than browsing the content for historical purposes. The content is provided as-is, from the moment of the last backup taken of the database in 2019. Image and video embeds are disabled on purpose and represented textually since most of those links are dead.
To view other archive projects go to
https://archives.mabination.com
-
Lan wrote on 2012-02-22 09:14
Canadian researchers find a simple cure for cancer, but major pharmaceutical companies are not interested.
Researchers at the University of Alberta, in Edmonton, Canada have cured cancer last week, yet there is a little ripple in the news or in TV. It is a simple technique using very basic drug. The method employs dichloroacetate, which is currently used to treat metabolic disorders. So, there is no concern of side effects or about their long term effects.
This drug doesn't require a patent, so anyone can employ it widely and cheaply compared to the costly cancer drugs produced by major pharmaceutical companies. [Image: http://www.sott.net/image/image/s3/66725/large/40764_f520.jpg]
Canadian scientists tested this dichloroacetate (DCA) on human's cells; it killed lung, breast and brain cancer cells and left the healthy cells alone. It was tested on Rats inflicted with severe tumors; their cells shrank when they were fed with water supplemented with DCA. The drug is widely available and the technique is easy to use, why the major drug companies are not involved? Or the Media interested in this find?
In human bodies there is a natural cancer fighting human cell, the mitochondria, but they need to be triggered to be effective. Scientists used to think that these mitochondria cells were damaged and thus ineffective against cancer. So they used to focus on glycolysis, which is less effective in curing cancer and more wasteful. The drug manufacturers focused on this glycolysis method to fight cancer. This DCA on the other hand doesn't rely on glycolysis instead on mitochondria; it triggers the mitochondria which in turn fights the cancer cells.
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.
Pharmaceutical companies are not investing in this research because DCA method cannot be patented, without a patent they can't make money, like they are doing now with their AIDS Patent. Since the pharmaceutical companies won't develop this, the article says other independent laboratories should start producing this drug and do more research to confirm all the above findings and produce drugs. All the groundwork can be done in collaboration with the Universities, who will be glad to assist in such research and can develop an effective drug for curing cancer.
You can access the original research for this cancer here.
This article wants to raise awareness for this study, hope some independent companies and small startup will pick up this idea and produce these drugs, because the big companies won't touch it for a long time.
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/228583-Scientists-cure-cancer-but-no-one-takes-notice
Wonder if it's legit.
-
Cynic wrote on 2012-02-22 09:15
If it is legit, I wouldn't be very surprised.
-
RebeccaBlack wrote on 2012-02-22 09:17
Canadian researchers find a simple cure for cancer, but major pharmaceutical companies are not interested.
This drug doesn't require a patent, so anyone can employ it widely and cheaply compared to the costly cancer drugs produced by major pharmaceutical companies.
lol
Gotta make that money~
-
Hiccup wrote on 2012-02-22 09:18
Wow, really?
My lil sis had cancer. Thank god it didn't come back. This could've easily made life easier then having to suffer through radiation "therapy".
-
paladin wrote on 2012-02-22 09:20
Quote from RebeccaBlack;782405:
lol
Gotta make that money~
Capitalism works that way
You really cant blame the companies lol
Only hope is canada gov
The U.S gov would never see light
Canada maybe
-
Episkey wrote on 2012-02-22 09:21
Googling dichloroacetate leads me to a bunch of articles refuting and disproving what you wrote .... sadly.
However, it's not that dichloroacetate is useless, it may actually have potency against cancer cells.
Here's a scientific paper on it if you are curious:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2567082/?tool=pubmed
-
TA wrote on 2012-02-22 09:33
Bogus. It's also
from 2006. I don't know why it was brought back up.
The article itself was written by someone who obviously has no clue what they're talking about.
-
Cucurbita wrote on 2012-02-22 09:36
This article seems to be more of an attack on capitalists rather than being about cancer cures.
If a cheap cure for cancer is found, it will go viral whether the market wants you to find out or not. Some Doctors may be about money, but most of them chose their profession because they want to help people. They wouldn't just pretend something like that doesn't exist.
-
Kueh wrote on 2012-02-22 09:40
It's legit, but I don't think people understand exactly what this drug is for.
This is not a cancer pill that you can take and cure your cancer. This drug is a treatment for a specific type of cancer. It might make the cancer go away, but it might just reduce the symptoms in a bad case.
Cancer is a class, not an individual symptom. It's the same as saying "mental illness". If there is someone who you know is mentally ill, you don't know anything about the specific symptoms or the cause. There are a variety of causes for cancer, and it actually matters whether you caught cancer from radiation, or from carcinogens, or from genetic predisposition. Each one is a different problem that requires a different cure. It's not as simple as this article makes it sound.
-
TA wrote on 2012-02-22 09:49
lol, nonsense. Look into the data on those trials. It's a bunch of junk science nonsense.
If you want to know how to
actually cure cancer, then here you go:
http://sens.org/files/pdf/WILT.pdf
-
Cucurbita wrote on 2012-02-22 09:50
I personally hope we NEVER cure cancer.
[Image: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_FDJEjsALYoA/TStwHVJEFyI/AAAAAAAAA5o/xu5E9e6CCmk/s1600/i-am-legend_0.jpg]
Quote from TA;782473:
lol, nonsense. Look into the data on those trials. It's a bunch of junk science nonsense.
If you want to know how to actually cure cancer, then here you go: http://sens.org/files/pdf/WILT.pdf
NOOOO
-
Hiccup wrote on 2012-02-22 09:52
Quote from TA;782473:
lol, nonsense. Look into the data on those trials. It's a bunch of junk science nonsense.
If you want to know how to actually cure cancer, then here you go: http://sens.org/files/pdf/WILT.pdf
That link doesn't want to load at all for me.
-
Cucurbita wrote on 2012-02-22 09:54
Quote from Hiccup;782483:
That link doesn't want to load at all for me.
You got something to view pdf with?
-
TA wrote on 2012-02-22 09:57
Quote from Hiccup;782483:
That link doesn't want to load at all for me.
If your browser can't view pdf files natively then right click and "save link as" and view with Adobe Reader.
-
BobYoMeowMeow wrote on 2012-02-22 17:59
methods for curing cancer requires training and testing
make sure it's really safe
Master's friend actually made a drug against cancer in her sophomore year of high school
[video=youtube;ak1twXfbv_c]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ak1twXfbv_c[/video]
Got to meet Obama and that jazz