Current Events > If cancer were contagious, how much more urgent would a cure be sought?

(+) Yeah! (+)

I imagine the medical community would unify and act with extreme agency
---

There's no such thing as a silver bullet "cure" for cancer.
---

DrizztLink posted...

There's no such thing as a silver bullet "cure" for cancer.

It's a hypothetical, just go with it, silly
---

Cancer will never have a cure
---

EverDownward posted...

It's a hypothetical, just go with it, silly

On both sides, though. Cure and contagious possibility.

It's like making a hypothetical "If unicorns were real, would the dragon population smoke cigars?"
---

You guys sure are full of positivity
---

Conspiracy theory time. They wouldn't want to find a cure, since it would be more profitable to keep them hooked on drugs for a lifetime. Don't think there are very many Jonas Salks working for big pharma at the moment.
---

EverDownward posted...

You guys sure are full of positivity

It's not negativity, it's that 'cancer cure' is a misnomer. It would be like saying you had the cure for disease; there are so many types of cancers that all evolve differently and have completely different treatment requirements.

but they all have one thing in common: uncontrolled cell proliferation
just fix that and cancer is cured ez pz nerds
---

If it was contagious, we'd all be dead or pre-disposed.. So a cure would be redundant.

loafy013 posted...

Conspiracy theory time. They wouldn't want to find a cure, since it would be more profitable to keep them hooked on drugs for a lifetime. Don't think there are very many Jonas Salks working for big pharma at the moment.

Level Dark Net conspiracy time. They wouldn't want to find a cure, since they most likely created it or will try to weaponize it to reduce earths population and/or eliminate political enemies.

loafy013 posted...

Conspiracy theory time. They wouldn't want to find a cure, since it would be more profitable to keep them hooked on drugs for a lifetime. Don't think there are very many Jonas Salks working for big pharma at the moment.

As if a sure fire cure wouldn't itself be immensely valuable to own.
---

loafy013 posted...

Conspiracy theory time. They wouldn't want to find a cure, since it would be more profitable to keep them hooked on drugs for a lifetime. Don't think there are very many Jonas Salks working for big pharma at the moment.

This is such a stupid conspiracy theory. First of all, since they would control the cure, they could hypothetically charge whatever they wanted. Second, not all governments on earth agree and it's unlikely that countries with socialized medicine would want to continue to pay for cancer treatments if there was a cure. Not only that, but pharmaceutical companies are fairly competitive, if one company found the cure, they could destroy their competition by curing everyone and making their rivals go bankrupt because they only have treatments that no one needs anymore. It's not like humanity is going to run out of illnesses any time soon, either.

HPV is contagious and a carcinogen.
---

The FDA is blocking the frontier of treatment, which is P53 gene therapy.

The p53 gene is present in all organisms and its function is to destroy tumors. Many cases could simply be fought with gene therapy and possibly one or two rounds of chemotherapy.

But why does the fda block it? Because theyre greedy, shady bastards who only care about money. I wish more people would open their eyes and see that the fda is full of shit.
---

southcoast09 posted...

The FDA is blocking the frontier of treatment, which is P53 gene therapy.

The p53 gene is present in all organisms and its function is to destroy tumors. Many cases could simply be fought with gene therapy and possibly one or two rounds of chemotherapy.

But why does the fda block it? Because theyre greedy, shady bastards who only care about money.

Except the FDA has no jurisdiction in any other country with functional medical research. This assumption is based entirely on the idea that the entirety of technological advancement comes from the US, and not places that would actually have a huge incentive to develop these 'miracle cures' (such as places with socialized medicine).

The medical industry does not want to cure cancer. Cancer treatments cost a fortune and cancer patients are complete gold mines as far as they're concerned. I watched them pump my dad full of every experimental cancer drug they could get their hands on because he had an extremely good insurance plan. He still died anyway.

If you can sell somebody $10,000 worth of drugs and cure them vs sell them $2,000,000 worth of drugs and they die, which is better for the bottom line?
---

r4X0r posted...

The medical industry does not want to cure cancer. Cancer treatments cost a fortune and cancer patients are complete gold mines as far as they're concerned. I watched them pump my dad full of every experimental cancer drug they could get their hands on because he had an extremely good insurance plan. He still died anyway.

If you can sell somebody $10,000 worth of drugs and cure them vs sell them $2,000,000 worth of drugs and they die, which is better for the bottom line?

Dead people can't be cured of other diseases down the line.