There's a cure for cancer

But keeping people sick allows you to make so much more money. So what's the point of making all those promotion for XX cancer and donating when you know there's never going to be a cure. In this world people are greedy, always need more money. What are they going to do? Cure someone or take away the pain for a few years forcing them to shallow pills two times a day for 30 years making them pay every time for new pills, getting a few thousand dollars off him times the millions of people in the world with cancer.

Discuss.

Although, here, the goverment, and subsequently the public would have to pay for thoses pills. While the health care under the NHS is "free" it's shit. A cure for cancer would lower costs here.

Also, what do those cancer research charities actually do with the money they're given?

NHS health care hasn't been that bad from my experience. I'd take it over greedy privatized bastards, (hint of bias there) I would absolutely certainly take the cure for cancer, human lives are worth more than money.

Well yeah, money is being made from cancer, I wouldn't be surprised if a cure had already been found. If the pharmaceutical companies can make more profit from one scenario, they will work toward that scenario, because they are profit making organizations. Profit making organizations should not have people's lives in the palms of their hands.

I never donate my money. Never. But however I do leave tips for good waiters XD

While I think there are alot of people in the world that would do that.

Your forgetting that there are good people in the world. If I had the cure I would give it up and there are a ton of people who would to. Not everyone that has power and alot of money are horrible people. So if there was a cure I'm sure that it would have been leaked by now.

If they offered you enough of your fair share to keep the word secret and earn a large income salary at the same time, would there truly be any argument? After all, the type of world we live in is still dog-eat-dog. Not too many people care about others if it never involves them, and though there are people willing to do good in this world (lol Dark Knight), what are the chances that one of these almost-inconceivably moral peoples are also in on the secret.
So essentially, as long as they make money off of it, I'm sure that about 85-90% of the world would not help others. I can't say personally because I don't have the fate of millions dying of cancer resting in a single sentence I could say.

Thats the problem, according to my teacher, her brother had some kind of brain disease. They found some guy in Alberta who could cure it, it didn't cost much. He offered to the Pharmaceutical companies his product, but they rejected. Why? because they rather suppress the disease since it brings in a lot more money.And its not because it cost a lot to produce.

And I agree there's good people in the world, but those people aren't the ones who controls the world. I was reading a Norm Chompsky book. Did you know microsoft is somewhat owned by an other company. Nearly everything is completely owned by 6 companies. And do you know what does 6 companies mainly produce? Nuclear weapons. I wish I had the graph I was shown in a movie. But its quite sad when the world is completely controlled ( Media - Politic - Economics - Medical) by 6 companies who build weapons of mass destruction. In the end ~ we make money by making people suffer & die.

Yep, that is about the shape of it. Like I've said in other threads, this kind of injustice should not be allowed to go on. People who know about this and do nothing are at least partly responsible for what happens. Needless to say there are some good people in the world who won't stand for such things. But it is difficult to ascertain a course of action to take that will not make us just as bad as these corporate murderers.

The solution I suppose, lies in education, if more people know about this kind of stuff then more people will act in opposition to it. I think that a lot of the 85=90% of people that Catcher mentioned may change their minds about what they are doing if they can see first hand the suffering it causes.

In general I believe that education and health care should be free and available to everyone. Education is vitally important for the future prosperity of human beings, and is too often neglected, but then again it's easier to control people if you keep them ignorant.

Journalism should be unbiased and help to look after the best interests of the people. Rather than what it has degenerated into these days........

Bah anyway, the general point I'm trying to get across is that if there is going to be a government ruling over the people, then it should not bow before whoever has the deepest pockets.

Yes, if one of those hogs that have their pockets full with cash could lose a family member to cancer, or lose a friend to cancer, then they could probably see why they need to change.

Believe it or not there are cures for cancer. One of my uncles was diagnosed and had 6 months left to live. Guess what? He's still here thanks to this one herb that my relatives gave him. Now he doesn't go anywhere without it.

I wouldn't take the money I would do the right thing and give out the cure. Your saying that your greedy enough to take the money at the cost of all those lives?

I am completely agree with you, i said it before, i believe that cure for cancer was found a lot of time ago but the pharmaceuthical companys dont want to this see the light cause actually the cancer is a very good business for them, this is bad cause who doesnt have losed an important friend, brother, sister, mom, dad, grandma or grandpa for this fuckin disease.

I think that we wont see a real cure for cancer in this years or decades.

I'm saying that we both don't know whether or not we would take the money, because we haven't truly been offered an opportunity to take such a large sum of currency.
I'm not saying you're wrong in your thoughts. In fact, you might be one of the few who are kind enough in this world to care. I personally know that I'm very easily tempted, but I like to think (and hopefully this would be true) I would indeed distribute the cure.

This is a cure for cancer, but you have to find it at it's earlier stage. That's why people have to get regular check ups. What people are looking for is a cure for terminal cancer, when it is extremely spread out.

I have a friend who is as old as me, I just recently found out he had signs of lung cancer. He has been smoking since he was 11, and now he has cancer at the age 20.

There may be a cure for cancer but, then again there may not be a ultimate cure. If a cure already existed then why all the effort to keep medicine improving at the rate that it has been? Herman Cain was diagnosed with stage 4 colon Cancer in 2006. In 2004 stage 4 colon cancer was a death sentence and all the doctor could do would be to make you comfortable. Survival rates for various cancers have been improving and so have the methods. While I think there should be some method to make sure such a cure isn't withheld in the interest of money I am willing to give them a benefit of a doubt. A dead customer isn't good for business.

Your fighting the apathy and complacency of the people. Those are diseases that only they can cure themselves. You can't cure it for them.



"free" education and health care isn't free in any sense of the word. Money comes from somewhere and no matter where you take the money from somebody ends up with the bill and it's always the average citizen in the form of higher prices and/or higher taxes. Also quality and quantity diminish when its "free" England is banning certain cancer medications because they are too expensive. Apparently, the British Government has the authority to put a price tag on the lives of it's citizens. These drugs are the only method to prolong the lives of cancer patients and this kind of rationing would never happen in the free market health care system. America has the best quality of care, the numbers back up my statement. Our survival rates for colon, cervical, breast, etc cancers are higher than any other country. The problem with our system is how to pay the bill better. I'll save commenting on government education for some other time. Link below to England Banning Drugs:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1159506/Life-prolonging-cancer-drugs-banned-cost-much.html

I'm in absolute agreement here. Whoever controls information, controls the mind. Whoever controls the mind, controls the body.



See? You and I aren't that different. Same goals just different approaches and "moral" limitations.

What about Gardasil? That was a recent thing, I even am getting the dosages. There's 3 series of the shot.



I guess I should elaborate.
I'm getting the shot because my aunt has had cervical cancer when she got pregnant the first time.

At first the shot was looked down from people, well *some* people. Can't please everybody, right? Because they claimed the shot gave people an excuse to have sex. Riight.

It doesn't *cure* the cancer, but it stops the things that causes it 70% of the time.

chris rock has a damn good point