Cure for cancer; does anyone believe this?

I'm skeptical of any new miracle cure, especially one that advertises such broad effects.
 
FormerHangie said:
Considering that cancer is not just one disease, I find it hard to believe that there is one cure for all types of cancer.

If they have a cure for one type, that's still great news, but what I read sounded more like a press release than a scientific study.
Click to expand...

I agree. This is like saying that they have a cure for "the flu", when what we call "flu" is really multiple different viruses (viri?). One thing is unlikely to fix everything. There are so many kinds of cancer that having a cure for all of them is unlikely.

However, if they even have a really good treatment for one kind of cancer, then I'll be thrilled to hear it.
 
I don't believe it. No scientific publication is touting it, and the Motley Fool is claiming it's a bogus story to push their stock price.
 
My understanding is that cancer is a multitude of diseases with different pathways for progression. If that is right there will never be a "single cure" for cancer. Sadly.

But like our departed friend Norman: I know nothing!

-Skip
 
Treating cancer is a big business, and if this is true it will have an enormous impact on revenue. If there's anything to this new cure, there will likely be tons of scrutiny and attempts at discrediting it.
 
This is along way from human clinical trial assuming it ever makes it there. This may just be a pump and dump.
 
The news site got you to share it though, that's all that really matters to them.
 
FormerHangie said:
Considering that cancer is not just one disease, I find it hard to believe that there is one cure for all types of cancer.

If they have a cure for one type, that's still great news, but what I read sounded more like a press release than a scientific study.
Click to expand...

They probably need more funding...


Tom
 
Sorry to hear about your brother, John.
 
EdFred said:
Not to be snarky, but what crime is it almost?

In the article I read they said it may be a year away before it could be up for approval.
Click to expand...
I don't consider it snarky. Of course, it is not a crime in the legal sense. But when an otherwise healthy loved one may not be around for another year due to Cancer, announcements like this hurt even more. If the announcement is false or misleading, it will cause a lot of desperate people to be devastated when they find that out. Purposely doing that to people should be a crime.

On the other hand, even if it is vastly overinflated, but based in credible fact, it is an amazing breakthrough and they deserve much credit (and tons of profit).
 
Knowing nothing about the topic sure doesn't stop guys from forming opinions about it, and then sharing the baseless opinions. The power of the internet!
 
Eric Stoltz said:
I don't believe it. No scientific publication is touting it, and the Motley Fool is claiming it's a bogus story to push their stock price.
Click to expand...

Motley Fool is the biggest heaping pile of bogus BS I’ve ever read. Although maybe they’re right this one time.
 
My response to anything like this is usually that I will believe it when I see it. I have very strong doubts. I would love to be proven wrong.
 
So much clickbait and popup advertising, I couldn't even make it through the first paragraph. For that reason alone, no. Were there any validity to it, we'd likely hear something from a reputable source.
 
I probably shouldn't say I read the same article on Fox News yesterday then?
 
I should clarify -- If the article says that someone claims to have made a big breakthrough, then I believe it. If the article claims that someone HAS made a big breakthrough, then I don't. People claim stuff (cough... TIGHAR... cough) all the time.
 
And who thought modified New Castle chicken virus might work. In 2012 this looked really promising and now not so much.

NDV strain MTH-68 was developed by Csatary and colleagues and has been tested in cancer patients via inhalational, intravenous, and intracolonic route. In a case report of a child with glioblastoma multiforme and a case series of four patients with colorectal cancer, Hodgkin disease, and melanoma, patients were treated with NDV for periods of time that ranged from 1 month to 7 years [143,162]. All of the patients had either partial or complete response to therapy. Four of the patients in addition were treated with conventional chemotherapy, making interpretation of the results difficult. In a separate randomized placebo-controlled phase II trial, 33 patients with various advanced cancers were treated with twice-weekly inhalation of NDV and 26 patients received placebo [159]. Two complete responses, six partial responses, and two patients with stable disease were reported in 10
 
Color me skeptical too. I hope I'm wrong, but it sounds too good to be true.
 
My brother-in-law sent me a link to a Forbes article on this announcement.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/robins...e-cure-for-cancer-within-a-year/#5c338e283621

The American Cancer Society is skeptical:
Still skepticism was high among those in the know. Weighing in on behalf of the American Cancer Society (ACS) on his blog, “A Cure For Cancer? Not So Fast,” Len Lichtenfeld, MD, ACS chief medical officer cautioned: “…it goes without saying, we all share the aspirational hope that they are correct. Unfortunately, we must be aware that this is far from proven as an effective treatment for people with cancer, let alone a cure."

Lichtenfeld went on to list several key points that he says must be kept in mind no matter what media reports say... <snip>
Click to expand...
 
I'll believe it when it comes out as done, finished, real. In the meantime, my cancer surgery was over 10 years ago. My daughter-in-law just had cancer surgery earlier today. We'll see...
 
I think the article is a bit overzealous. The concepts are promising but at least decade+ plus away. This is an oversimplification of what they are doing now for very specific cancers. They idea that there will be one singular universal cure is shortsighted. I think if you look at this as a new approach to producing novel individualized agents for ppl- yes I’ll go along with that.
 
Sadly, the list of failed claims of cancer cures is enormous.

Also, when or if one does come, I really don't think it will follow statements such as found in this news article;

"...we will offer in a year’s time a complete cure for cancer"
"...will be effective from day one, will last a duration of a few weeks and will have no or minimal side-effects at a much lower cost"
 
JOhnH said:
If the announcement is false or misleading, it will cause a lot of desperate people to be devastated when they find that out. Purposely doing that to people should be a crime.
Click to expand...
Meh, I find the entire holistic health industry far more criminal in this sense. People love to hate on legit pharma companies as being evil greedy bastards. But legit pharma cannot claim any of their products are effective without sufficient government sanctioned evidence proving the claim.

Holistic product manufacturers and practitioners? They can legally tell you their beat juice and corn husk concoction has been proven to cure whatever ails you with absolutely zero evidence and there is nothing anyone can do to stop them. And lots of very scared people die from very curable medical conditions because they choose to believe the claims of someone who was making profit from selling a 'holistic' cure and thus opt out of legitimate medical treatment. That is not criminal and it really should be.
 
It may be legit. . .when I was a kid, some leukemia was a death sentence; not so much anymore, especially in kids. New things come up, like D3 reducing risk of certain cancers dramatically, etc. Seems like the progress has been made along lot's of fronts, with many therapys and preventitive measures.

Used to be treatment was always some combo of cut, burn, or poison. Still is, to a large degree, but it's changing fast now. . .

Humans are pretty high body temperture mammals, and we live a long time compared to other primates and mammals - it's kinda surprising we don't have more frequent cancer, really.
 
Stewartb said:
Knowing nothing about the topic sure doesn't stop guys from forming opinions about it, and then sharing the baseless opinions. The power of the internet!
Click to expand...
Well it is in the Hanger Talk section. Is there such a thing as a baseless opinion? I can see the term baseless fact. The op asked for ' what do you think' and that is what he got.
 
Sundancer said:
It may be legit. . .when I was a kid, some leukemia was a death sentence; not so much anymore, especially in kids. New things come up, like D3 reducing risk of certain cancers dramatically, etc. Seems like the progress has been made along lot's of fronts, with many therapys and preventitive measures.

Used to be treatment was always some combo of cut, burn, or poison. Still is, to a large degree, but it's changing fast now. . .

Humans are pretty high body temperture mammals, and we live a long time compared to other primates and mammals - it's kinda surprising we don't have more frequent cancer, really.
Click to expand...
I had a tenant develop lung cancer. I thought he was gonna die. But because of a new stem cell treatment it's turned into a chronic condition.
 
Why is this "news" different than any other we've seen. Person makes a statement, media publishes it without investigation or proof, gets plenty of views and moves on to next story.
 
Not too long ago a company in Sweden claimed it found a cure for cancer in Breast Milk... Now there's something worth looking at. :ihih: ...I mean...into...
 
I’ve often heard that modern day medical advances allow for a cure for cancer to exist, it would just put the massively profitable biotech industry out of business. Pretty sad if it’s true.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top