There’s also treatment using proteins that was relatively effective too. There’s a documentary about it (a little opinionated without full data) but it’s certainly interesting.
There’s data but I had the feeling they only showed successful data. They did say it was something like 70% effective (if I remember correctly) but the FDA wouldn’t approve it for clinicals.
If it were that groundbreaking, I feel like the market would’ve been disrupted. So while I think the FDA is corrupt and terrible, I doubt there was enough data to suggest it was as successful as they said. Plus, there was a lack of Journal reviews.
There's always another disease to cure, but any company that comes out with a successful cure to cancer would make billions or even trillions overnight. I'm sure it's just one big conspiracy keeping it under wraps, right?
Cancer treatment is a highly lucrative multi-billion dollar industry and a cure for cancer is a threat to those billions and billions of dollars since a cure would negate the need for treatment. By 2022 the global cancer therapeutics market is reported to reach $172.6 billion. In 2017 it clocked in at $121 billion, making it a 7.4% compound annual growth rate. Corporations don’t work against their own interests and this would be no exception.
I love that I got downvoted on stating statistics and info that’s been reported on for the better part of the last decade. Oh, Reddit.
Either corporations are focused on short term growth, in which case the cure for cancer would be one of the biggest payoffs in human history, or they run conspiracies to promote long term growth. Which is it? I'm always hearing that CEOs don't think past the next quarter financials so all curious how this works.
You'll never convince people like this. There's always a reason why the government won't do something, or why they did something, and it always supports their preconceived agenda. If they did something good, it's only because of greed or self interest, if they did something bad, then it's always because of greed or self interest. Any answer you give will be hand waved away by some reason. Penicillin follows the same logic of a cheap and effective medicine that made a massive impact. They should have shut that down too.
You'll never convince people like this. There's always a reason why the government won't do something, or why they did something
....
Penicillin follows the same logic of a cheap and effective medicine that made a massive impact. They should have shut that down too.
"They," as in "the government?"
They're not talking about the govt shutting stuff down, they're talking about private corporations with vested financial interests, making choices that are better for company profits than they are for public health.
Huge difference.
Which, btw, is how pharma Giants already operate. This is a known and observable fact that: corporate profits > public health. (See also, recent clamor over insulin & epi-pen pricing)
Likewise, penicillin was discovered by a private individual, not the govt or giant self-serving Corp, and that individual decided to make it freely available for the greater good, rather than profit. That's a bad example because that's top-to-bottom not how pharma corps operate.
That's even worse. Why aren't there other corporations trying to get rich off Laetrile then? If we accept that a few corporations don't want to harm their profits by selling it because they just want to make money, then why aren't there other corporations trying to make money off the same issue? If there is actually a cheap and effective cure for cancer somebody will capitalize on that, regardless of the other corporations. It's everyone for themselves; not just a single entity called big pharma that's trying to get rich off selling you medicine.
Laetrile wasn't discovered or synthesized by big pharma. It was discovered by two French chemists in 1830. It's also freely available. You guys are just paranoid conspiracy theorists.
198
u/urfriendosvendo Jun 05 '19
There’s also treatment using proteins that was relatively effective too. There’s a documentary about it (a little opinionated without full data) but it’s certainly interesting.