Nothing major? Almost every form of cancer is treatable. 20 years ago, any form of cancer was a death sentence.

Many people feel this way but I don't understand why.
If you put out a medicine that killed cancer and charged $25,000 to each patient who wants it, you would be a TRILLIONAIRE.

About 1,500 people die of cancer every day, and each of them would take out a second mortgage for a drug to save their life.

The average cost to treat cancer now is close to $300,000.

There is a reason there has not been one single cure for any disease EVER.

And obviously, the reason has nothing to do with how the human body and diseases work, but instead, mass conspiracy.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

:helpme:helpme

Could be, or it could be it is much more profitable to treat diseases rather than cure them. I don't think anyone can say with certainty as to why.

Ok smart guy, name one disease thats been cured.

Define Cured.
Smallpox
Polio
Diptheria
Chicken Pox
Rubella

etc etc....vaccine is the same result as a cure is it not?

Or are you meaning, after someone is sick and already fighting the disease then we can step in and cure them?

Lots of diseases are curable - Not sure what you mean?

I didn't realize chickenpox until just now. That's interesting.

cured past participle, past tense of cure (Verb)
Verb

Relieve (a person or animal) of the symptoms of a disease or condition: "he was cured of the disease".

Wouldn't a preventable vaccine render your conspiracy idea moot either way?

The last major medical breakthrough was the vaccine for polio (vaccine is not a cure) which happened in the 1950's. Doesnt it seem odd to you that nothing else has been developed in the past 50 years?

He is confusing disease with virus.

which isn't a bad thing, considering overpopulation of the Earth

For me, the biggest worry about any breakthrough is India's court ruling the other week that allows their country to copy vaccines, pharmaceutical advances etc, sell them at huge discounts and not allow those who figured it out to have their licence fee to pay for their research. I think it is 10 years companies get on copyright. I know Viagra's licence was up this year, that other companies can now put out their own brand. That can only hold fantastic advances that are just around the corner back, they won't throw the money into research if it becomes a free-for-all in places like India

Great news!

nevermind...

Every coin has two sides - the Swiss medicine was 15 times as in FIFTEEN TIMES more expensive than the same one made in India. But that's not the point, big pharmas spend millions on research and they need to turn good profit in order to do so; however, they play dirty too - they make minor changes to their drugs and then apply for patent extension and I think this is what this particular ruling was all about.

Do we even want a magic bullet treatment to cure cancer?

Think about how many people will throw caution to the wind and smoke 60 a day, forget about doing their annual breast exam/cervical smear, ignore rising pollution levels, increased use of pesticides...

Because the dangers of dyeing from cancer will be reduced doesn't mean the risks to overall health from all this shit will be too. I doubt the majority will see it like that though.

/Devil's advocate.

This is how the zombie outbreak stats. Listen to Will Smith, he knows!

This is why I said what I said.. Medical science is at the mercy of Pharma companies. Meaning it's all controlled by what is good for "profits" not what is good for health & humanity.

This is why we haven't cured a disease since Polio in 1955, but we sure as hell have created a lot of "treatments" that cost a lot of money. Meaning they will never cure cancer they will only figure out how to prolong your life as long as you "pay" for treatment.