If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   New cancer drug that instructs defective DNA to self-destruct could cure half of all cancers, decimate populations of West Virginia, Kentucky, and Alabama   (nytimes.com) divider line 134
    More: Obvious, West Virginia, DNA, cancer types, cure  
•       •       •

9967 clicks; posted to Main » on 23 Dec 2012 at 12:33 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



134 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-12-23 11:13:51 AM
I laughed.
 
2012-12-23 11:16:31 AM
There's another company called Cellceutix (CTIX, which I am long in) that's got a drug from a completely novel class of compounds that is in Phase I human testing right now.  It also targets the p53 gene, but so far it has shown no toxicity.  None.  Soon it might be possible to go through chemo without losing your hair and half of your body weight.  It's a fantastic time for biotech, I hope these guys figure it all out and save lots of lives (maybe even mine...).
 
2012-12-23 11:25:33 AM
Well, Maine is going to be heavily depopulated as well.
 
2012-12-23 12:34:09 PM
Goodbye Arkansas.
 
2012-12-23 12:35:16 PM
In other news. Producers of Reality Shows fear massive layoffs.
 
2012-12-23 12:35:19 PM
drug companies don't cure anything, theres no profit in it.

They'll make it so you have to keep taking for it to work.
 
2012-12-23 12:36:30 PM

Spanky_McFarksalot: drug companies don't cure anything, theres no profit in it.

They'll make it so you have to keep taking for it to work.


A poison so subtle it only kills you if you stop taking it.
 
2012-12-23 12:36:51 PM
You forgot Mississippi, Texas, Arizona, Louisiana, Tennessee, Georgia, South Carolina, Arkansas, Alaska, Indiana, and Florida.
 
2012-12-23 12:38:28 PM
If you put Rhode Island on that list, you would not get an objection from me.
 
2012-12-23 12:40:43 PM
so *that's* what the beginning of Prometheus was all about
 
2012-12-23 12:40:52 PM
Still no cure for...oh wait.

Cymbal
You forgot Mississippi, Texas, Arizona, Louisiana, Tennessee, Georgia, South Carolina, Arkansas, Alaska, Indiana, and Florida.

...and Cincinnati.
 
2012-12-23 12:41:19 PM
Still no cure for Texas?
 
2012-12-23 12:41:58 PM

Spanky_McFarksalot: drug companies don't cure anything, theres no profit in it.

They'll make it so you have to keep taking for it to work.


This is poisonous stupidity and needs to stop being repeated.
 
2012-12-23 12:43:05 PM

Cymbal: You forgot Mississippi, Texas, Arizona, Louisiana, Tennessee, Georgia, South Carolina, Arkansas, Alaska, Indiana, and Florida.


Also left off the list: Iowa, New Jersey, Montana, New Jersey, Utah, and New Jersey.
 
2012-12-23 12:44:07 PM
Bravo, subby.
 
2012-12-23 12:44:43 PM

MycroftHolmes: This is poisonous stupidity and needs to stop being repeated.


they cure something, it will be.
 
2012-12-23 12:47:00 PM
Stem cell research bad!
 
2012-12-23 12:49:07 PM
You know who else was into destroying defective DNA?
www.historical-library.net
 
2012-12-23 12:49:55 PM
As someone who is dying because my body can't tell good cells from bad anymore, I don't see any potential problems with this AT ALL.

/Weirdly, was working on a p53-related drug before I got sick.
//Don't think it's related...
 
2012-12-23 12:50:13 PM
Decimate means to remove 10%

Just saying.
 
2012-12-23 12:51:08 PM
Don't forget Congress.
 
2012-12-23 12:52:00 PM
I can't understand the logic of believing you have a drug that will cure deadly forms of cancer and then NOT using it on people who will be long dead before you finish exploring minute toxicity studies.

You can donate your body to science after you die but apparently "Give me the drug, I don't CARE what it might do to me because I KNOW I will be dead in a month without it" just doesnt hold water. Seriously, if I knew I was terminal I would take whatever "might be efficacious according to lab mice" drug they wanted to try out on me.
 
2012-12-23 12:52:06 PM

NewportBarGuy: Well, Maine is going to be heavily depopulated as well.


Maine? Try New York. There's a population that's been inbreeding for a hundred years.
 
2012-12-23 12:52:33 PM

Cymbal: You forgot Mississippi, Texas, Arizona, Louisiana, Tennessee, Georgia, South Carolina, Arkansas, Alaska, Indiana, and Florida.


Must be nice to be such a huge douche that you look down on 28% of the rest of your country.

/fair number of mutants in Ohio as well you douche
 
WD
2012-12-23 12:52:40 PM

TanSau: Decimate means to remove 10%


FACT: Some words have more than one meaning.
 
2012-12-23 12:53:14 PM

Spanky_McFarksalot: MycroftHolmes: This is poisonous stupidity and needs to stop being repeated.

they cure something, it will be.


How about infectious diseases? They used to be the leading cause of death, and now idiots can get away with not being vaccinated because they've become so rare.
 
2012-12-23 12:54:09 PM

Diagonal: Cymbal: You forgot Mississippi, Texas, Arizona, Louisiana, Tennessee, Georgia, South Carolina, Arkansas, Alaska, Indiana, and Florida.

Also left off the list: Iowa, New Jersey, Montana, New Jersey, Utah, and New Jersey.


Only the parts here in New Jersey that are full of brain dead... oh never mind, just make sure I'm out of there before the destruction starts.
 
2012-12-23 12:56:51 PM

LabGrrl: dying because my body can't tell good cells from bad anymore...

How lame is that? Fark cancer.
(Crosses fingers)
 
2012-12-23 12:56:58 PM

Diagonal: Cymbal: You forgot Mississippi, Texas, Arizona, Louisiana, Tennessee, Georgia, South Carolina, Arkansas, Alaska, Indiana, and Florida.

Also left off the list: Iowa, New Jersey, Montana, New Jersey, Utah, and New Jersey.


And we're now at 20 of 50 states.  Come on, might as well add 5 more so we have a majority and we can now say that America would just be wiped out.  You're almost there already.
 
2012-12-23 12:57:12 PM

Fizpez: I can't understand the logic of believing you have a drug that will cure deadly forms of cancer and then NOT using it on people who will be long dead before you finish exploring minute toxicity studies.

You can donate your body to science after you die but apparently "Give me the drug, I don't CARE what it might do to me because I KNOW I will be dead in a month without it" just doesnt hold water. Seriously, if I knew I was terminal I would take whatever "might be efficacious according to lab mice" drug they wanted to try out on me.


Which is precisely why it is a good thing that there are mechanisms in place like ethics committees and regulatory agencies to prevent misguided profit-seeking companies from exploiting that desperation.
 
2012-12-23 12:58:32 PM
WD: FACT: Some words have more than one meaning.

Sure, when used improperly. "Annihilate" would have been the better choice.
 
2012-12-23 01:02:10 PM

Cymbal: You forgot Mississippi, Texas, Arizona, Louisiana, Tennessee, Georgia, South Carolina, Arkansas, Alaska, Indiana, and Florida


and England
 
2012-12-23 01:02:33 PM
this thread was funny and fun
 
2012-12-23 01:03:39 PM

ultraholland: WD: FACT: Some words have more than one meaning.

Sure, when used improperly. "Annihilate" would have been the better choice.


THIS^^^^^
 
2012-12-23 01:05:07 PM

justGreg: Fizpez: I can't understand the logic of believing you have a drug that will cure deadly forms of cancer and then NOT using it on people who will be long dead before you finish exploring minute toxicity studies.

You can donate your body to science after you die but apparently "Give me the drug, I don't CARE what it might do to me because I KNOW I will be dead in a month without it" just doesnt hold water. Seriously, if I knew I was terminal I would take whatever "might be efficacious according to lab mice" drug they wanted to try out on me.

Which is precisely why it is a good thing that there are mechanisms in place like ethics committees and regulatory agencies to prevent misguided profit-seeking companies from exploiting that desperation.


I 100% agree that you trying to sell me a drug "because it might save your life" requires the type of oversight provided - but if they are willing to provide it for free I fail to see how I can not make the choice to accept it - regardless of how desperate I may be. I'm not talking about "we have 1000 molecular candidates and want to blindly feed them to people" - but if the lab results show there is some potential for real benefit and you are already at a stage where doctors are comfortable making predictions of your death in the next 3-6 weeks then I think you should have the right to waive those oversights and any claim against the drug company for whatever might happen.

I'd rather be USED as a lab rat in this case, even if it only serves to show this particular drug won't work, then die anyway and have someone else down the line die as well because THEY are now the first test subject.
 
2012-12-23 01:06:14 PM
Oh come on. How could all of you have forgotten to include Oklahoma on that list?
 
2012-12-23 01:06:19 PM
Goodnight, moon.
 
2012-12-23 01:06:53 PM
So they found a cure for Masshole cancer?
 
2012-12-23 01:07:53 PM

Tell Me How My Blog Tastes: There's another company called Cellceutix (CTIX, which I am long in) that's got a drug from a completely novel class of compounds that is in Phase I human testing right now.  It also targets the p53 gene, but so far it has shown no toxicity.  None.  Soon it might be possible to go through chemo without losing your hair and half of your body weight.  It's a fantastic time for biotech, I hope these guys figure it all out and save lots of lives (maybe even mine...).


Yes it is! Biotech is the future. Understanding how and why matter behaves the way it does, and unraveling the program of DNA is where all the fun and progress are going to be.
 
2012-12-23 01:08:35 PM

StrikitRich: So they found a cure for Masshole cancer?


Yeah, they burn the leaves off the trees before they start to fall.
 
2012-12-23 01:08:59 PM

Louisiana_Sitar_Club: LabGrrl: dying because my body can't tell good cells from bad anymore...
How lame is that? Fark cancer.
(Crosses fingers)


Sarcasm detector broken. I'm dying of an autoimmune disease. My body would quite happily eat any cancer cells it found. Unfortunately, it also eats healthy lung tissue. When I get to the lung transplant level, they can't replace mine, because as someone whose immune system rejects ITSELF even on massive immunosuppression, I'm never going to qualify for a transplant. The problem with drugs that work with p53 is that we end up with assloads of anti-p53, which is what you see in Lupus (insert House joke here.)

About 5 years ago, every cancer lab I knew was doing p53, and about 10 years ago, they were all working with CD40, drugs revolving around which were going to cure HIV *and* cancer, and instead just gave all the already immunodeficient mice autoimmune-related *death.*

But we got some great anti-arthritis drugs from those mice.
/Now it's radioprotectants and old forms of radiation.
 
2012-12-23 01:10:24 PM

Fizpez: but if the lab results show there is some potential for real benefit and you are already at a stage where doctors are comfortable making predictions of your death in the next 3-6 weeks then I think you should have the right to waive those oversights and any claim against the drug company for whatever might happen.

I'd rather be USED as a lab rat in this case, even if it only serves to show this particular drug won't work, then die anyway and have someone else down the line die as well because THEY are now the first test subject.



FWIW, that type of situation is considered and balanced into the equation by both agencies and ethics committees in pretty much the manner you suggest. The bar for a GBM (glioblastoma multiforme) study for example is much lower in terms of required safety and tox data than for a hypertension study. But it really has to be higher than "good rat data" because cancer has been cured in rats hundreds of times.
 
2012-12-23 01:10:25 PM

Elegy: Cymbal: You forgot Mississippi, Texas, Arizona, Louisiana, Tennessee, Georgia, South Carolina, Arkansas, Alaska, Indiana, and Florida.

Must be nice to be such a huge douche that you look down on 28% of the rest of your country.

/fair number of mutants in Ohio as well you douche


We already covered Cincinnati upthread.
 
2012-12-23 01:11:11 PM

ultraholland: so *that's* what the beginning of Prometheus was all about


Oh sure. ET gave them the p53 gene, and it ate their DNA, so then we could come in the space ship and the captain could fark the ice queen and then Shaw had the baby they made try to eat her but instead they ate it.

And that is the creation story of kalamari, which we celebrate by rolling xenomorphs up into a big ball and eating them like crab ball soup, which let me tell you reminds me of android hydraulic fluid leaking into their data cores, y'see-
 
2012-12-23 01:12:14 PM

GAT_00: And we're now at 20 of 50 states. Come on, might as well add 5 more so we have a majority and we can now say that America would just be wiped out. You're almost there already.


We're just going where the truth leads us.
 
2012-12-23 01:14:04 PM

Fizpez: I can't understand the logic of believing you have a drug that will cure deadly forms of cancer and then NOT using it on people who will be long dead before you finish exploring minute toxicity studies.

You can donate your body to science after you die but apparently "Give me the drug, I don't CARE what it might do to me because I KNOW I will be dead in a month without it" just doesnt hold water. Seriously, if I knew I was terminal I would take whatever "might be efficacious according to lab mice" drug they wanted to try out on me.


Lawyers
 
2012-12-23 01:17:03 PM

Fark Rye For Many Whores: ultraholland: so *that's* what the beginning of Prometheus was all about

Oh sure. ET gave them the p53 gene, and it ate their DNA, so then we could come in the space ship and the captain could fark the ice queen and then Shaw had the baby they made try to eat her but instead they ate it.

And that is the creation story of kalamari, which we celebrate by rolling xenomorphs up into a big ball and eating them like crab ball soup, which let me tell you reminds me of android hydraulic fluid leaking into their data cores, y'see-


I'm reminded of the harvest of the clam beds on Epsilon VII... the gathering sleds auto detect any substandard product...
 
2012-12-23 01:17:31 PM

Fizpez: You can donate your body to science after you die but apparently "Give me the drug, I don't CARE what it might do to me because I KNOW I will be dead in a month without it" just doesnt hold water.


"You would have been dead in a month" doesn't hold water against a lawsuit when the patient has to live with some previously unknown side-effect from the medicine.

As long as lawyers are looking for lawsuits, the drug companies have no choice but to keep their stuff away from the public until they're 100% sure that it won't cause some minor inconvenience for the patient.
 
2012-12-23 01:17:34 PM

Fizpez: Seriously, if I knew I was terminal I would take whatever "might be efficacious according to lab mice" drug they wanted to try out on me.


It turns out that a LOT of drugs that work in mice do not show the same results when the trials move to testing with lower primates.  You get another drop in results when you move from lower primates to humans.  So just because it works with lab mice, don't suddenly expect that it will work with people.

Second, if you happen to die one day earlier from the drug than you would have from cancer, your family can sue the drug maker.  Even if you signed an agreement, they can sue, and because judges like to see their names in the paper, they'll probably fail to dismiss it at a pretrial hearing.  So the drug makers do not have a lot of incentive to switch to human trials too early.

Third, a large number of negative reactions in early trials might sour investor support for drug research.  It might also overwhelm some smaller labs.  So they keep the numbers low.
 
2012-12-23 01:21:22 PM
cassandraparkin.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-12-23 01:22:09 PM

Spanky_McFarksalot: drug companies don't cure anything, theres no profit in it.

They'll make it so you have to keep taking for it to work.


No. This is stupid and a foolish, ignorant, idiotically PARANOID statement and I will tell you why.

A cancer cure, or at least a nigh-100% treatment for several types of cancer, IS A LICENSE TO PRINT MONEY.

This isn't farking polio or smallpox. Cancer is not going to 'stop existing' once we develop an effective cure, even if we distribute it *Freely*, because CANCER IS YOUR OWN BODY GOING @#%#@ BUGNUTS. PEOPLE WILL STILL GET IT.

I'm not lying, I put statments like this up there with "ZOMG The GUBBMIN'T GONNA USE THE UN TO TAKE MAH GUNS!" in terms of paranoia. Do I believe pharmaceutical companies are benevolent? Fark no! But at the very least, in terms of *cancer*, *your argument makes no sense*.
 
2012-12-23 01:23:28 PM
i1079.photobucket.com
 
2012-12-23 01:23:55 PM

Fizpez: I'd rather be USED as a lab rat in this case, even if it only serves to show this particular drug won't work, then die anyway and have someone else down the line die as well because THEY are now the first test subject.


So lets say that you had a prognosis of 6 months to live.  You start taking the drugs and you're dead in 2 weeks.  You just lost months of your life where you could have said goodbye to your friends and family, traveled the world, or done whatever else was on your bucket list.

If you wait till the cancer if more advanced so you can do those things, suddenly you may find that you're in a stage of cancer too far advanced for the trials to work.  They're not going to want to test on you because you'll drag their case averages down.
 
2012-12-23 01:25:25 PM

Felgraf: A cancer cure, or at least a nigh-100% treatment for several types of cancer, IS A LICENSE TO PRINT MONEY.


which is why they won't cure it even if they could. It worth to much money.

so thanks for agreeing with me.
 
2012-12-23 01:25:57 PM

Felgraf: Spanky_McFarksalot: drug companies don't cure anything, theres no profit in it.

They'll make it so you have to keep taking for it to work.

No. This is stupid and a foolish, ignorant, idiotically PARANOID statement and I will tell you why.

A cancer cure, or at least a nigh-100% treatment for several types of cancer, IS A LICENSE TO PRINT MONEY.

This isn't farking polio or smallpox. Cancer is not going to 'stop existing' once we develop an effective cure, even if we distribute it *Freely*, because CANCER IS YOUR OWN BODY GOING @#%#@ BUGNUTS. PEOPLE WILL STILL GET IT.

I'm not lying, I put statments like this up there with "ZOMG The GUBBMIN'T GONNA USE THE UN TO TAKE MAH GUNS!" in terms of paranoia. Do I believe pharmaceutical companies are benevolent? Fark no! But at the very least, in terms of *cancer*, *your argument makes no sense*.


It's still LESS MONEY than they currently get. Not that I think they would suppress a cure.
 
2012-12-23 01:26:39 PM
Utah beats all other states at skiing. Ours is just better; deal with it Colorado.

We also beat all other states at inbreeding

I could be wrong, but I am pretty sure that more of your tax dollars are going to pay for medical problems caused by inbreeding in Utah than West Virginia, Maine and Kentucky put together.
 
2012-12-23 01:27:22 PM

Felgraf: Spanky_McFarksalot: drug companies don't cure anything, theres no profit in it.

They'll make it so you have to keep taking for it to work.

No. This is stupid and a foolish, ignorant, idiotically PARANOID statement and I will tell you why.

A cancer cure, or at least a nigh-100% treatment for several types of cancer, IS A LICENSE TO PRINT MONEY.

This isn't farking polio or smallpox. Cancer is not going to 'stop existing' once we develop an effective cure, even if we distribute it *Freely*, because CANCER IS YOUR OWN BODY GOING @#%#@ BUGNUTS. PEOPLE WILL STILL GET IT.

I'm not lying, I put statments like this up there with "ZOMG The GUBBMIN'T GONNA USE THE UN TO TAKE MAH GUNS!" in terms of paranoia. Do I believe pharmaceutical companies are benevolent? Fark no! But at the very least, in terms of *cancer*, *your argument makes no sense*.


Thanks for saying this, by the way. All the lab staff I know living the lush ten-thousandaire lifestyle, working 60 hours a week and making minimum wage after you take out the price of their student loans out are too busy sleeping on the one weekend a year many of them have off to make this comment, and it needs to be repeated... A LOT.
Anyone who thinks that 'big pharma' is hiding 'teh cure' has never met the people working on teh treatmenzt.
 
2012-12-23 01:28:27 PM
I guess this means no reunion show for the cast of Jersey Shore.
 
2012-12-23 01:28:29 PM

Spanky_McFarksalot: which is why they won't cure it even if they could. It worth to much money.

so thanks for agreeing with me.


... No, because, see, if one company releases a cure that works *much better* than their competitors (who, lets say, are intentionally sabatoging it!), then everyone will BY THE #@$%@# ONE THAT WORKS.

Do you realize that for your argument to be true *all the scientists* performing the research have to be in on it, too? (And before you go "Well, yeah, they're doing it for the money!", no. You generally do not go into science for the money.)

Look. You really, really sound like those people that INSIST that there must be a conspiracy amongst EVERY SINGLE SCIENTIST that supports global warming.
 
2012-12-23 01:28:39 PM

TanSau: Decimate means to remove 10%


No it doesnt. Not any more. That was it's original meaning, back in the dawn of time.
Now:  Kill, destroy, or remove a large percentage of.

Sucks to be you, living in the past, unwilling or unable to realize that languages "change."
LOL
 
2012-12-23 01:29:14 PM

Benjamin Orr: [cassandraparkin.files.wordpress.com image 739x530]


nice
 
2012-12-23 01:30:07 PM
I thought fark had a rule about postings to websites which require passwords.
Stupid NYT
 
2012-12-23 01:30:31 PM

TanSau: Decimate means to remove 10%

Just saying.


Every tenth soldier.
 
2012-12-23 01:30:56 PM

Diagonal: , Utah.


Oops, I missed this. I was about to say "No one mentioned Utah? Oh, Fark, I am disappoint"

Inbreeding in West Virginia, Kentucky, etc is accidental. People there won't marry a cousin if there is someone cute and who isn't related they can hook up with.

Polygamist cultists in Utah think it is God's Will that they impregnate their nieces.

And your tax dollars pay for it all.
 
2012-12-23 01:30:58 PM

Quantum Apostrophe: Tell Me How My Blog Tastes: There's another company called Cellceutix (CTIX, which I am long in) that's got a drug from a completely novel class of compounds that is in Phase I human testing right now.  It also targets the p53 gene, but so far it has shown no toxicity.  None.  Soon it might be possible to go through chemo without losing your hair and half of your body weight.  It's a fantastic time for biotech, I hope these guys figure it all out and save lots of lives (maybe even mine...).

Yes it is! Biotech is the future. Understanding how and why matter behaves the way it does, and unraveling the program of DNA is where all the fun and progress are going to be.


I know this is the field you're pushing for when you gloom 'n' doom other threads, but it's so pleasantly surprising seeing you positive about scientific progress that it actually brightened my day a little bit. Thanks for that. :)

\ We're still all leaving on 3D-printed spaceships
 
2012-12-23 01:31:51 PM

lewismarktwo: It's still LESS MONEY than they currently get. Not that I think they would suppress a cure.


Why? They could just charge more than what they're currently charging.

When the demand for the good is "You die/have a higher chance of dying if you don't get this", the elasticity in price tends to be reaallllyyyy low.

LabGrrl: Felgraf: Spanky_McFarksalot: drug companies don't cure anything, theres no profit in it.

They'll make it so you have to keep taking for it to work.

No. This is stupid and a foolish, ignorant, idiotically PARANOID statement and I will tell you why.

A cancer cure, or at least a nigh-100% treatment for several types of cancer, IS A LICENSE TO PRINT MONEY.

This isn't farking polio or smallpox. Cancer is not going to 'stop existing' once we develop an effective cure, even if we distribute it *Freely*, because CANCER IS YOUR OWN BODY GOING @#%#@ BUGNUTS. PEOPLE WILL STILL GET IT.

I'm not lying, I put statments like this up there with "ZOMG The GUBBMIN'T GONNA USE THE UN TO TAKE MAH GUNS!" in terms of paranoia. Do I believe pharmaceutical companies are benevolent? Fark no! But at the very least, in terms of *cancer*, *your argument makes no sense*.

Thanks for saying this, by the way. All the lab staff I know living the lush ten-thousandaire lifestyle, working 60 hours a week and making minimum wage after you take out the price of their student loans out are too busy sleeping on the one weekend a year many of them have off to make this comment, and it needs to be repeated... A LOT.
Anyone who thinks that 'big pharma' is hiding 'teh cure' has never met the people working on teh treatmenzt.


Yeah, I'm a physics grad student (Though some of my work could eventually have medical applications! Yay nanotech), and I sort of get... confused when people suggest scientists are engaging in a conspiracy "FOR THE MONEY", or to get all that "sweet grant money", etc. It's like "You... don't really understand what motivates *most* people who go into the sciences, do you?"
 
2012-12-23 01:32:14 PM

Felgraf: Do you realize that for your argument to be true *all the scientists* performing the research have to be in on it, too?


never said the people working on it didn't want to find a cure, I said the drug companies wouldn't let it out if they did.

The big drug companies need their workers to toil away for their stock holders so they wouldn't tell them they don't really want a cure.
 
2012-12-23 01:32:20 PM
 
2012-12-23 01:34:05 PM

Spanky_McFarksalot: drug companies don't cure anything, theres no profit in it.

They'll make it so you have to keep taking for it to work.


and no one with cancer in the universe would care.
a "cure" which I need to take forever, but allows me to not die from cancer?
Yah, I am ok with that.
 
2012-12-23 01:37:03 PM

Spanky_McFarksalot: MycroftHolmes: This is poisonous stupidity and needs to stop being repeated.

they cure something, it will be.


Why don't you go ahead and whip up a cure for us? Easy, right? They're just sitting on all those cures they have?

We'll wait. We'll even make you filthy stinking rich when you're done.

Are you done yet?
 
2012-12-23 01:37:21 PM

Spanky_McFarksalot: Felgraf: Do you realize that for your argument to be true *all the scientists* performing the research have to be in on it, too?

never said the people working on it didn't want to find a cure, I said the drug companies wouldn't let it out if they did.

The big drug companies need their workers to toil away for their stock holders so they wouldn't tell them they don't really want a cure.


The current trend in laboratory research design is big, giant, shared workspaces (which, by the way, and apropos of nothing, I hate.) Entire floors of buildings with 50 lab tables and 30 PIs. Trust me, we know when other labs are having pizza for lunch, when a PI has PMS and when stuff goes wrong (or right.)
Lab staff is paid such crap that even those who would not put a 'supressed' cure on protocol-online would sell one to the highest bidder in seconds.
Really, if you're not the PI, or trying to become one, the only hope you have of making serious fundage is your lab having the next cure and your name being on the paper.
 
2012-12-23 01:39:37 PM

Dokushin: Why don't you go ahead and whip up a cure for us? Easy, right? They're just sitting on all those cures they have?


They've had hundreds of billions of dollars, an army of scientists and many decades to try.

I couldn't do any worse.
 
2012-12-23 01:40:09 PM

GardenWeasel: Fizpez: I can't understand the logic of believing you have a drug that will cure deadly forms of cancer and then NOT using it on people who will be long dead before you finish exploring minute toxicity studies.

You can donate your body to science after you die but apparently "Give me the drug, I don't CARE what it might do to me because I KNOW I will be dead in a month without it" just doesnt hold water. Seriously, if I knew I was terminal I would take whatever "might be efficacious according to lab mice" drug they wanted to try out on me.

Lawyers


Clients
 
2012-12-23 01:40:15 PM

Diagonal: Cymbal: You forgot Mississippi, Texas, Arizona, Louisiana, Tennessee, Georgia, South Carolina, Arkansas, Alaska, Indiana, and Florida.

Also left off the list: Iowa, New Jersey, Montana, New Jersey, Utah, and New Jersey.


And SW Virginia
 
2012-12-23 01:44:19 PM

Poppa Zit: I'm reminded of the harvest of the clam beds on Epsilon VII... the gathering sleds auto detect any substandard product...


It's a good place to work, the scanners being so efficient most of the clams are free. "Substandard" my ass, most of them the company won't take but will give you only a mild radio frequency throbbing in the stellar cartography range.

Some say it's beaming out mostly in a certain direction towards Eridani but I say there's no proof and anyway being so close in frequency to microwaves it warms the ketchup for dipping.
 
2012-12-23 01:46:59 PM

LabGrrl: Louisiana_Sitar_Club: LabGrrl: dying because my body can't tell good cells from bad anymore...
How lame is that? Fark cancer.
(Crosses fingers)

Sarcasm detector broken. I'm dying of an autoimmune disease. My body would quite happily eat any cancer cells it found. Unfortunately, it also eats healthy lung tissue. When I get to the lung transplant level, they can't replace mine, because as someone whose immune system rejects ITSELF even on massive immunosuppression, I'm never going to qualify for a transplant. The problem with drugs that work with p53 is that we end up with assloads of anti-p53, which is what you see in Lupus (insert House joke here.)

About 5 years ago, every cancer lab I knew was doing p53, and about 10 years ago, they were all working with CD40, drugs revolving around which were going to cure HIV *and* cancer, and instead just gave all the already immunodeficient mice autoimmune-related *death.*

But we got some great anti-arthritis drugs from those mice.
/Now it's radioprotectants and old forms of radiation.


Ah, gotcha. I just misunderstood. I have someone very close recently diagnosed with multiple myeloma and an excess of one antibody (pg, something, I think R - quite frankly it's just a blur of terms right now) has blown her kidneys out. That instantly came to mind when I read your post and thought you were dealing with something similar.
(fingers crossed for both of you)
 
2012-12-23 01:49:10 PM

Spanky_McFarksalot: never said the people working on it didn't want to find a cure, I said the drug companies wouldn't let it out if they did.


So, what, they murder the scientists who worked on it? What exactly keeps them from going public if they found a cure that worked in humans, aside from potential financial ruin? Eventually, *someone* wuold leak it.
 
2012-12-23 01:50:51 PM

Louisiana_Sitar_Club:
Ah, gotcha. I just misunderstood. I have someone very close recently diagnosed with multiple myeloma and an excess of one antibody (pg, something, I think R - quite frankly it's just a blur of terms right now) has blown her kidneys out. That instantly came to mind when I read your post and thought you were dealing with something similar.
(fingers crossed for both of you)


No prob, I was over-sharing. All of these "turn the immune system to 11" stories in the non-science press just piss me off. Almost as much as the "rich lab people hiding the cure" people.
Turning the immune system up to 11 is not a good thing.
 
2012-12-23 01:51:47 PM

Spanky_McFarksalot: Dokushin: Why don't you go ahead and whip up a cure for us? Easy, right? They're just sitting on all those cures they have?

They've had hundreds of billions of dollars, an army of scientists and many decades to try.

I couldn't do any worse.


More to the point, you couldn't do any better. But hey -- that science stuff is easy, right? It's clearly a conspiracy that they aren't finding new stuff faster. You fixed a toaster the other day, so the human body is automatically president.
 
2012-12-23 01:53:46 PM

Felgraf: So, what, they murder the scientists who worked on it? What exactly keeps them from going public if they found a cure that worked in humans, aside from potential financial ruin? Eventually, *someone* wuold leak it.


who said they found a cure? I never did. and I certainly never said they would kill scientists who found a cure.

You're sounding paranoid.
 
2012-12-23 01:55:34 PM
New Jersey makes that list.
 
2012-12-23 02:03:00 PM

Spanky_McFarksalot: who said they found a cure? I never did. and I certainly never said they would kill scientists who found a cure.

You're sounding paranoid.


You said/suggested they'd supress any cure they found. That would, basically, probably require murdering *every* person who knew about it, because most of the people who*do* research like this are in it because *THEY WANT TO CURE CANCER*.
 
2012-12-23 02:04:17 PM
Still no cure for Kansas.
 
2012-12-23 02:08:38 PM
farm1.staticflickr.com
 
2012-12-23 02:32:03 PM

Spanky_McFarksalot: Felgraf: Do you realize that for your argument to be true *all the scientists* performing the research have to be in on it, too?

never said the people working on it didn't want to find a cure, I said the drug companies wouldn't let it out if they did.

The big drug companies need their workers to toil away for their stock holders so they wouldn't tell them they don't really want a cure.


You are demonstrating yourself to be a full-on moron.
 
2012-12-23 02:34:39 PM

justGreg: You are demonstrating yourself to be a full-on moron.


no the scientists who have wasted hundreds of billions in research dollars with no progress have demonstrated themselves to be full-on morons.

They can't even cure the cold.

Yeah, good job guys.
 
2012-12-23 02:37:48 PM

Spanky_McFarksalot: justGreg: You are demonstrating yourself to be a full-on moron.

no the scientists who have wasted hundreds of billions in research dollars with no progress have demonstrated themselves to be full-on morons.

They can't even cure the cold.

Yeah, good job guys.


OK, so you're just a troll, and not even a particularly good one.
 
2012-12-23 02:38:35 PM

justGreg: OK, so you're just a troll, and not even a particularly good one.


good enough to get to you to respond, twice.
 
2012-12-23 02:42:28 PM

Benjamin Orr: [cassandraparkin.files.wordpress.com image 739x530]


Yep.
 
2012-12-23 02:46:24 PM

Spanky_McFarksalot: justGreg: You are demonstrating yourself to be a full-on moron.

no the scientists who have wasted hundreds of billions in research dollars with no progress have demonstrated themselves to be full-on morons.

They can't even cure the cold.

Yeah, good job guys.


There are dozens of small, start up biotech firms all over the world working on this problem right now.  If any one of them has a compound that works, big pharma will swoop in and buy it.  They will pay, on average, a billion dollars or more for something that has this kind of multi-cancer curing potential.  You're suggesting that big pharma's management, and their shareholders, will let them just sit on that investment.  That they'll simply not sell a product that could be worth in the tens of billions of dollars.  You're a moron.  They'll sell it.  That's how biotech works.  Please, don't defend yourself anymore.

Your argument is basically, "they haven't yet, so they must not want to."  Please, go scream at some clouds and let the rest of us discuss this rationally.
 
2012-12-23 02:47:06 PM
It's not just Cinci, it's basically everything south of I70.
 
2012-12-23 02:51:49 PM

Tell Me How My Blog Tastes: Your argument is basically, "they haven't yet, so they must not want to."  Please, go scream at some clouds and let the rest of us discuss this rationally.


if they haven't yet they must be incompetent and should all be fired.

how many billions of dollars and decades more will they waste?
 
2012-12-23 03:02:05 PM

MycroftHolmes: Spanky_McFarksalot: drug companies don't cure anything, theres no profit in it.

They'll make it so you have to keep taking for it to work.

This is poisonous stupidity and needs to stop being repeated.


I agree. According to Spanky McLunatic drug companies would never have allowed these diseases to be virtually eradicated (in the US):

1. Smallpox
2. Malaria
3. Typhoid
4. Rickets
5. Scurvy
6. Cholera
7. Rabies (as a disease that kills humans)
8. Measles
9. Mumps
10. Rubella
11. Polio
12. Rinderpest
13. Guinea Worm Disease
14. Hookworm
15. Lymphatic filariasis
16. Onchocerciasis (River Blindness)
17. Yaws
18. Typhus
19. Leprosy

and on and on and on...

As you can see, diseases aren't as simple as a company coming forward and giving us a pill so it is not as simple as a company deciding to 'not invent' or not market a cure.
 
2012-12-23 03:02:26 PM
Anybody else read the start of the zombie apocalypse in that article?
 
2012-12-23 03:05:49 PM

TanSau: Decimate means to remove 10%

Just saying.


i.usatoday.net
Impressed.
 
2012-12-23 03:07:48 PM
Speaking as someone who may well have a Bad Gene for a familial cancer syndrome (likely Lynch syndrome, but not gettin' tested until I'm sure the insurance company can't deny coverage if the answer is "yes"):

a) At least this might be helpful for folks with FAP (one of a number of p53-linked cancer syndromes) assuming the drug doesn't cause lupus (which has been the negative side effect of prior attempts--this does seem to use a different mechanism, so we'll see how primate and human trials go).

b) To really get rid of all the familial cancer syndromes (and a lot of spontaneous cancer syndromes) you also need something that can fix missense errors that the cellular repair mechanisms don't catch or help the body find these better. (This is what is specifically broken in Lynch syndrome--put in layman's terms, the genes in Lynch cancers tend to have a lot of "typos" and "bits of missing text" that aren't caught by the body's usual "typo flagger". Put in smartphone user's lingo--let's just say folks with Lynch syndrome have a particularly wonky version of Genetic Autocorrect that doesn't exactly correct typing errors or tends to correct them in the most inappropriate manner possible.)

c) IF it turns out that this is not something that is p53-specific...well, hopefully it'll be less ouchy in price than colonoscopies are and hopefully it's not one of those things that's going to inspire a Change.org petition because the Damn Insurance Company Won't Pay For The Lifesaving Miracle Drug. :P
 
2012-12-23 03:12:05 PM
Let's make the list as follows: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

Why no Delaware? What the fark is a Delaware?
 
2012-12-23 03:30:21 PM
Three years later:
2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-12-23 03:39:35 PM

Spanky_McFarksalot: drug companies don't cure anything, theres no profit in it.

They'll make it so you have to keep taking for it to work.


Actually there is tremendous profit in the cure because cancer will not be eradicated such as polio or small pox. As well, finding a legitimate cure to one or more forms of cancer means huge initial profits and taking the lion share of the market while increasing capital resources for the company while reducing over the long term those of the competition. Pharmaceutical companies do not do the bulk of medical research, and to not utilize the research first means the competition will.

There is, in fact, profit in any cure; what people are looking at is the pharmaceutical industry as a whole with long term profits of treatment versus cure in isolation, which is a drastic oversimplification.
 
2012-12-23 03:53:36 PM

Indolent: Goodbye Arkansas.


That's what I came here to say! WHY do people keep forgetting Arkansas?
 
2012-12-23 04:02:56 PM
Subby,

cdn.ebaumsworld.com
 
2012-12-23 04:04:11 PM
New cancer drug that instructs defective DNA to self-destruct could cure half of all cancers, decimate populations of West Virginia, Kentucky, and Alabama

You know, you don't even need the new drug to do that. Just scatter around some bottles of Oxycontin and methamphetamine spiked with ricin and they'll do that on their own.

spidermilk: MycroftHolmes: Spanky_McFarksalot: drug companies don't cure anything, theres no profit in it.

They'll make it so you have to keep taking for it to work.

This is poisonous stupidity and needs to stop being repeated.

I agree. According to Spanky McLunatic drug companies would never have allowed these diseases to be virtually eradicated (in the US):


2. Malaria
3. Typhoid Public health concerns that recieve funding to halt when they show up
6. Cholera

4. Rickets Cured through diet and supplementation dictated by the government.
5. Scurvy

7. Rabies (as a disease that kills humans) Minimized by requiring animals to be vaccinated creating herd immunity

8. Measles
9. Mumps Making a come back because people are "fighting big pharma
10. Rubella

19. Leprosy Only about 5% of the population is susceptible. Then the drugs take a year to work.

and on and on and on...

As you can see, diseases aren't as simple as a company coming forward and giving us a pill so it is not as simple as a company deciding to 'not invent' or not market a cure.


I'd like to point out that drug and chemical companies are still making money off many of the diseases listed.
 
2012-12-23 04:16:27 PM

Felgraf: Spanky_McFarksalot: drug companies don't cure anything, theres no profit in it.

They'll make it so you have to keep taking for it to work.

No. This is stupid and a foolish, ignorant, idiotically PARANOID statement and I will tell you why.

A cancer cure, or at least a nigh-100% treatment for several types of cancer, IS A LICENSE TO PRINT MONEY.

This isn't farking polio or smallpox. Cancer is not going to 'stop existing' once we develop an effective cure, even if we distribute it *Freely*, because CANCER IS YOUR OWN BODY GOING @#%#@ BUGNUTS. PEOPLE WILL STILL GET IT.

I'm not lying, I put statments like this up there with "ZOMG The GUBBMIN'T GONNA USE THE UN TO TAKE MAH GUNS!" in terms of paranoia. Do I believe pharmaceutical companies are benevolent? Fark no! But at the very least, in terms of *cancer*, *your argument makes no sense*.


I do think that everyone can probably agree that any eventual cancer cure will be far from cheap. I imagine it'll be as simple as calculating the total cost of cancer drugs for the average patient and charging that for the cure treatment.

To be fair, I'd gladly pay $20k (or whatever, not going to bother looking up actual costs) for a guaranteed cure than for a year of chemo.
 
2012-12-23 04:23:43 PM

MycroftHolmes: Spanky_McFarksalot: drug companies don't cure anything, theres no profit in it.

They'll make it so you have to keep taking for it to work.

This is poisonous stupidity and needs to stop being repeated.


But it's true! Wake up, sheeple, the internet was an inside job and Obama is a gun-hating lizard alien that the Mayans tried to warn us about!

...am I doing it right?
 
2012-12-23 04:33:14 PM
This can't happen! What will we talk about?
 
2012-12-23 04:34:26 PM

Dinjiin: Fizpez: I'd rather be USED as a lab rat in this case, even if it only serves to show this particular drug won't work, then die anyway and have someone else down the line die as well because THEY are now the first test subject.

So lets say that you had a prognosis of 6 months to live.  You start taking the drugs and you're dead in 2 weeks.  You just lost months of your life where you could have said goodbye to your friends and family, traveled the world, or done whatever else was on your bucket list.

If you wait till the cancer if more advanced so you can do those things, suddenly you may find that you're in a stage of cancer too far advanced for the trials to work.  They're not going to want to test on you because you'll drag their case averages down.


Right. If you're on the verge of death (in which case, I'm very sorry), you're probably far from an ideal subject--if the drug objectively 'works' but too many patients in the treatment group (or not enough in the control) die off, the drug's likely to be dead in the water.

Science, done correctly, is quite tragically slow. :\
 
2012-12-23 04:38:26 PM

Elegy: /fair number of mutants in Ohio as well you douche


Greetings beautiful mutants! And how may we be of service?

wizbangblog.com
 
2012-12-23 04:48:20 PM

CowardlyLion: But it's true! Wake up, sheeple, the internet was an inside job and Obama is a gun-hating lizard alien that the Mayans tried to warn us about!

...am I doing it right?


Somehow, in a world where a majority actually believed a bird almost flew away with a child, I'm not surprised that some people could never possibly grasp the idea that they might be lied to. Who cares if it's true or not? Even if it were the truth, there would be nothing anyone could do to change it. It is what it is.
 
2012-12-23 05:00:14 PM

Tell Me How My Blog Tastes: There's another company called Cellceutix (CTIX, which I am long in) that's got a drug from a completely novel class of compounds that is in Phase I human testing right now.  It also targets the p53 gene, but so far it has shown no toxicity.  None.  Soon it might be possible to go through chemo without losing your hair and half of your body weight.  It's a fantastic time for biotech, I hope these guys figure it all out and save lots of lives (maybe even mine...).


While I certainly hope they (and all other companies/researchers working on treating/curing human disease) are successful, it's discouraging to see that almost all of their preclinical data is from cell lines: Link ...not that findings from cell studies aren't necessarily valid (or that such research isn't worthwhile when done correctly), but it's a considerable leap from a cell line to an intact human.
 
2012-12-23 05:35:13 PM

Molavian: NewportBarGuy: Well, Maine is going to be heavily depopulated as well.

Maine? Try New York. There's a population that's been inbreeding for a hundred years.


The most powerful ethnic group in NY has been inbreeding for literally several thousand years.
 
2012-12-23 05:36:15 PM

GAT_00: Diagonal: Cymbal: You forgot Mississippi, Texas, Arizona, Louisiana, Tennessee, Georgia, South Carolina, Arkansas, Alaska, Indiana, and Florida.

Also left off the list: Iowa, New Jersey, Montana, New Jersey, Utah, and New Jersey.

And we're now at 20 of 50 states.  Come on, might as well add 5 more so we have a majority and we can now say that America would just be wiped out.  You're almost there already.


New Mexico, Nevada, Idaho, Wyoming, South Dakota, North Dakota
 
2012-12-23 05:38:08 PM
Insisting that a company can repress a cure while searching for one is ouroborus-grade derp.
 
2012-12-23 05:56:05 PM

funmonger: Insisting that a company can repress a cure while searching for one is ouroborus-grade derp.


It is scary that some people actually buy into that conspiracy theory. The idea that big pharma is actively suppressing research into curing certain chronic diseases involves the following assumptions

1. All pharmaceuticals will act in concert to avoid researching cures (and that this can be kept secret)
2. Only big pharmaceuticals can research, small labs, start-ups, academic labs, etc cannot research
3. The entire medical and research community can either be deceived regarding the feasibility of curing certain diseases, or their voices can be suppressed.

You want to argue that certain pharmaceutical companies are not dedicating money to researching cures for certain diseases, that is fine. They all have their own risk versus reward evaluations, so maybe not every company is going to research a cure for cancer. But to argue 'drug companies don't cure anything' is to be willfully ignorant. To continue to argue the point in the face of people pointing out how fallacious it is is to be proud and smug of your willful ignorance. In other words, dumb.
 
2012-12-23 06:16:21 PM

Indolent: Goodbye Arkansas.


There will be damm few people left in Tennesse.
 
2012-12-23 07:21:44 PM

spidermilk: I agree. According to Spanky McLunatic drug companies would never have allowed these diseases to be virtually eradicated (in the US):

1. Smallpox
2. Malaria
3. Typhoid
4. Rickets
5. Scurvy
6. Cholera
7. Rabies (as a disease that kills humans)
8. Measles
9. Mumps
10. Rubella
11. Polio
12. Rinderpest
13. Guinea Worm Disease
14. Hookworm
15. Lymphatic filariasis
16. Onchocerciasis (River Blindness)
17. Yaws
18. Typhus
19. Leprosy

and on and on and on...

As you can see, diseases aren't as simple as a company coming forward and giving us a pill so it is not as simple as a company deciding to 'not invent' or not market a cure.


Go a step further.
The nuts go on and on about not curing AIDS as long as they can make a fortune selling AIDS drugs.
But ignore the fact that AIDS research has led to better understanding of viri as a whole and those same drugs have been used to treat/cure other viri illnesses. FFS they are looking at a cure for hep-C??

So yah, I have no problem with big pharma doing most of what they do.
NOW, that being said, big pharma PAYING generic companies to NOT produce a generic version?
Sorry kiddies, that is or should be farking illegal in a big way.
 
2012-12-23 07:25:04 PM
so long east Tennessee...
 
2012-12-23 08:35:34 PM
New cancer drug that instructs defective DNA to self-destruct could cure half of all cancers, decimate populations of West Virginia, Kentucky, and Alabama, get everyone's hopes up, let them down

FTFY, subby. I think one of these links pop up on Fark once a month and these techs never see the light of day for whatever reason.
 
2012-12-23 08:44:06 PM
Fark you subby, yankees!
 
2012-12-23 09:41:19 PM
I bet this drug will cause cancer.
 
2012-12-23 09:44:11 PM

Tell Me How My Blog Tastes: There's another company called Cellceutix (CTIX, which I am long in) that's got a drug from a completely novel class of compounds that is in Phase I human testing right now.  It also targets the p53 gene, but so far it has shown no toxicity.  None.  Soon it might be possible to go through chemo without losing your hair and half of your body weight.  It's a fantastic time for biotech, I hope these guys figure it all out and save lots of lives (maybe even mine...).


If there's money to be made there's a way. Oh cancer treatment? That's too easy when people will die otherwise.
 
2012-12-23 10:33:10 PM

wildcardjack:
2. Malaria
3. Typhoid Public health concerns that recieve funding to halt when they show up
6. Cholera

4. Rickets Cured through diet and supplementation dictated by the government.
5. Scurvy

7. Rabies (as a disease that kills humans) Minimized by requiring animals to be vaccinated creating herd immunity

8. Measles
9. Mumps Making a come back because people are "fighting big pharma
10. Rubella

19. Leprosy Only about 5% of the population is susceptible. Then the drugs take a year to work.

and on and on and on...

As you can see, diseases aren't as simple as a company coming forward and giving us a pill so it is not as simple as a company deciding to 'not invent' or not market a cure.

I'd like to point out that drug and chemical companies are still making money off many of the diseases listed.


You can move the goal posts all that you want, but those diseases are cured.
 
2012-12-23 10:34:58 PM

Tell Me How My Blog Tastes: There's another company called Cellceutix (CTIX, which I am long in) that's got a drug from a completely novel class of compounds that is in Phase I human testing right now.  It also targets the p53 gene, but so far it has shown no toxicity.  None.  Soon it might be possible to go through chemo without losing your hair and half of your body weight.  It's a fantastic time for biotech, I hope these guys figure it all out and save lots of lives (maybe even mine...).


word
 
2012-12-23 10:47:21 PM
Now all we need is the destruct code.

www.startrek.com
 
2012-12-23 11:17:25 PM

lewismarktwo: Felgraf: Spanky_McFarksalot: drug companies don't cure anything, theres no profit in it.

They'll make it so you have to keep taking for it to work.

No. This is stupid and a foolish, ignorant, idiotically PARANOID statement and I will tell you why.

A cancer cure, or at least a nigh-100% treatment for several types of cancer, IS A LICENSE TO PRINT MONEY.

This isn't farking polio or smallpox. Cancer is not going to 'stop existing' once we develop an effective cure, even if we distribute it *Freely*, because CANCER IS YOUR OWN BODY GOING @#%#@ BUGNUTS. PEOPLE WILL STILL GET IT.

I'm not lying, I put statments like this up there with "ZOMG The GUBBMIN'T GONNA USE THE UN TO TAKE MAH GUNS!" in terms of paranoia. Do I believe pharmaceutical companies are benevolent? Fark no! But at the very least, in terms of *cancer*, *your argument makes no sense*.

It's still LESS MONEY than they currently get. Not that I think they would suppress a cure.


It's also the plot of Johnny Mnemonic.

Which starred not only Keanu Reeves, but also Takeshi from Takeshi's Castle (overdubbed in the USA as Most Extreme Elimination Challenge).

Fyi
 
2012-12-23 11:23:40 PM

spidermilk: MycroftHolmes: Spanky_McFarksalot: drug companies don't cure anything, theres no profit in it.

They'll make it so you have to keep taking for it to work.

This is poisonous stupidity and needs to stop being repeated.

I agree. According to Spanky McLunatic drug companies would never have allowed these diseases to be virtually eradicated (in the US):

1. Smallpox
2. Malaria
3. Typhoid
4. Rickets
5. Scurvy
6. Cholera
7. Rabies (as a disease that kills humans)
8. Measles
9. Mumps
10. Rubella
11. Polio
12. Rinderpest
13. Guinea Worm Disease
14. Hookworm
15. Lymphatic filariasis
16. Onchocerciasis (River Blindness)
17. Yaws
18. Typhus
19. Leprosy

and on and on and on...

As you can see, diseases aren't as simple as a company coming forward and giving us a pill so it is not as simple as a company deciding to 'not invent' or not market a cure.


Splain how drug companies eradicated guinea worm?
 
2012-12-24 12:10:39 AM
What story started out his way? Oh yeah, I Am Legend.
 
2012-12-24 01:50:35 AM

Fizpez: Seriously, if I knew I was terminal....


Got some bad news for you. You are.
 
2012-12-24 03:13:47 AM

Cymbal: You forgot Mississippi, Texas, Arizona, Louisiana, Tennessee, Georgia, South Carolina, Arkansas, Alaska, Indiana, and FloridaNew York, New Jersey, and California.


Fixed
 
2012-12-24 05:44:03 AM

Suckmaster Burstingfoam: lewismarktwo: Felgraf: Spanky_McFarksalot: drug companies don't cure anything, theres no profit in it.

They'll make it so you have to keep taking for it to work.

No. This is stupid and a foolish, ignorant, idiotically PARANOID statement and I will tell you why.

A cancer cure, or at least a nigh-100% treatment for several types of cancer, IS A LICENSE TO PRINT MONEY.

This isn't farking polio or smallpox. Cancer is not going to 'stop existing' once we develop an effective cure, even if we distribute it *Freely*, because CANCER IS YOUR OWN BODY GOING @#%#@ BUGNUTS. PEOPLE WILL STILL GET IT.

I'm not lying, I put statments like this up there with "ZOMG The GUBBMIN'T GONNA USE THE UN TO TAKE MAH GUNS!" in terms of paranoia. Do I believe pharmaceutical companies are benevolent? Fark no! But at the very least, in terms of *cancer*, *your argument makes no sense*.

It's still LESS MONEY than they currently get. Not that I think they would suppress a cure.

It's also the plot of Johnny Mnemonic.

Which starred not only Keanu Reeves, but also Takeshi from Takeshi's Castle (overdubbed in the USA as Most Extreme Elimination Challenge).

Fyi


Snatch back yo brain zombie! Snatch it back and hold it!
/your ever watch that movie... on mushrooms?
 
2012-12-24 10:25:19 AM

Suckmaster Burstingfoam: spidermilk: MycroftHolmes: Spanky_McFarksalot: drug companies don't cure anything, theres no profit in it.

They'll make it so you have to keep taking for it to work.

This is poisonous stupidity and needs to stop being repeated.

I agree. According to Spanky McLunatic drug companies would never have allowed these diseases to be virtually eradicated (in the US):

1. Smallpox
2. Malaria
3. Typhoid
4. Rickets
5. Scurvy
6. Cholera
7. Rabies (as a disease that kills humans)
8. Measles
9. Mumps
10. Rubella
11. Polio
12. Rinderpest
13. Guinea Worm Disease
14. Hookworm
15. Lymphatic filariasis
16. Onchocerciasis (River Blindness)
17. Yaws
18. Typhus
19. Leprosy

and on and on and on...

As you can see, diseases aren't as simple as a company coming forward and giving us a pill so it is not as simple as a company deciding to 'not invent' or not market a cure.

Splain how drug companies eradicated guinea worm?


Drug companies did not eradicate most of those diseases. I'd say government regulations (i.e. vaccination programs, sanitation requirements) and nutrition guidelines/mandates cured them the most. The point is that people are saying 'CURING DISEASES NOT PROFITABLE- so diseases won't be cured!!' when that is clearly crazy and not true. Pfizer doesn't control all medical research, and conspiracy theories about them having the cure and just locking away are rediculous. If they didn't want a cure, why would they even research it since any research will contribute to our understanding of cancer.

I'm not SAYING that cervical cancer is cured (people still get it) but deaths from it have declined 70% between 1955 and 2003.

I know that cancer is awful and depressing, but it pisses me off when people are so 'WE WILL NEVER CURE IT.' Never say never. bah.
 
2012-12-24 12:04:26 PM
How about we just call it Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming?
 
2012-12-24 04:18:23 PM

show me: How about we just call it Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming?


Know how I know you're from Missouri?
 
2012-12-25 03:12:40 AM

spidermilk: Suckmaster Burstingfoam: spidermilk: MycroftHolmes: Spanky_McFarksalot: drug companies don't cure anything, theres no profit in it.

They'll make it so you have to keep taking for it to work.

This is poisonous stupidity and needs to stop being repeated.

I agree. According to Spanky McLunatic drug companies would never have allowed these diseases to be virtually eradicated (in the US):

1. Smallpox
2. Malaria
3. Typhoid
4. Rickets
5. Scurvy
6. Cholera
7. Rabies (as a disease that kills humans)
8. Measles
9. Mumps
10. Rubella
11. Polio
12. Rinderpest
13. Guinea Worm Disease
14. Hookworm
15. Lymphatic filariasis
16. Onchocerciasis (River Blindness)
17. Yaws
18. Typhus
19. Leprosy

and on and on and on...

As you can see, diseases aren't as simple as a company coming forward and giving us a pill so it is not as simple as a company deciding to 'not invent' or not market a cure.

Splain how drug companies eradicated guinea worm?

Drug companies did not eradicate most of those diseases. I'd say government regulations (i.e. vaccination programs, sanitation requirements) and nutrition guidelines/mandates cured them the most.


Uh, let's correct this a bit, shall we:

1) Smallpox--eliminated via a massive vaccination push by the World Health Organisation in partnership with the pharmaceutica company known now as Sanofi Pasteur to offer vaccination at little or no cost to areas where epidemics were occuring.

2) Malaria is largely controlled in First World countries, but is still rampant in the Third World--and we're actually starting to lose the fight now that artemenisin resistance is starting to show up in areas where pretty much nothing else will work. (Malaria is pretty damn good at becoming resistant to antimalarials, as it turns out.) Unfortunately, the mosquitoes that carry the malaria are ALSO damn good at becoming resistant to the stuff we sprayed on them to eliminate them from First World countries (don't bring up DDT, pretty much the mosquitoes that carry malaria LAUGH at the stuff, you might as well spray rose water in their general direction for what it would do now)...and so we're now at the stage of trying to figure out how the hell to make a vaccine to protect against infection from a protozoan that invades your red blood cells and makes them burst open.

3)-6) I'll grant are from nutritional and sanitary advances--but one of the big revolutions in cholera treatment has been the use of oral rehydrating solutions and antibiotics to kill the vibrios that cause it...which are made by pharmaceutical companies and (again) provided at little or no cost to developing nations. Also, typhoid treatment has been revolutionised by--yet again--antibiotics produced by pharmaceutical companies (typhoid carriers can get antibiotic treatment instead of having a complete colectomy--that was why Typhoid Mary ran like hell from treatment, because they proposed to cure her by removing her entire colon)

7) We do not in the least have rabies controlled in the Americas or Africa or Asia--that said, vaccination programs on islands combined with extremely strict quarantine measures have wiped out rabies in a few areas (most successfully, the UK and Ireland). Rabies will probably never be entirely eliminated until we can concoct an almost totally effective oral vaccine for wild rabies vectors--primarily insectivorous bats, haemovore bats (the famous vampire bats, a major rabies vector in South America) and wild carnivores.

8)-10): Were almost eliminated in the United States via universal, compulsory vaccination as a condition of entering schools (public and private) and mandatory quarantine of those ill. With antivaxxers hitting on religious and philosophical "exemptions" originally intended for Christian Scientists, we're now seeing epidemics again--and these diseases always have had a bit of a reservoir in populations that didn't vax heavily.

(Also, re measles specifically--It turned out the vaccine originally developed for measles wears off at around age 18, and it wasn't recognised that a booster shot was necessary until college kids started coming down with the measles in the 80s and 90s. We know now a booster is required in adulthood.)

11) Effectively eliminated in most of the world through mandatory vaccination programs--there is a real reason that pretty much anyone over the age of 70 or 80 considers Salk and Sabin to be candidates for frank sainthood, and that's because effective vaccination pretty much wiped out a disease that quarantines (sometimes keeping kids quarantined all summer) and even full-on shutdowns of towns couldn't stop. It WOULD have been the third disease wiped out entirely by humanity (after smallpox and rinderpest) except that you have a mess of Wahhabist antivaxxer idiots who live in Afghanistan and Nigeria and Somalia who apparently think the very technique they invented to prevent smallpox is some kind of Western abomination, and so those three parts of the world keep spreading it to other bits of Africa and Asia. (And were those idiots in control back in 1971, we'd STILL probably be living with the goddamn smallpox, too.)

12) Declared extinct in 2011 as a result of a UN-led vaccination program in conjunction with pharmaceutical companies who provided the vaccine at little to no cost--including finding a method to vaccinate wild bovids who were reserve hosts against rinderpest. (Also proves that--if we could ever deal with the antivaxxers and fundie-derptards of various religions--we could probably wipe out measles, seeing as measles is pretty much a human-adapted rinderpest virus that no longer makes cows sick.)

13) Pretty much hygiene is most of guinea worm eradication, but some of the efforts involve human-safe larvicides put in the water to kill the copepods which are the reserve host of this bit of nightmare fuel. Probably will be the second human disease (and the third all around) made extinct in the wild.

14)-16) Actually, the BIG thing that was done that wiped out hookworm in the Southeast US (which was a MAJOR issue well up into the 60s) was--of all things--handing out deworming meds (that are made by pharmaceutical companies) as part of mandatory deworming in public school systems. The thing that's been putting the biggest dent in transmission of filariases and helminthic infections in sub-Saharan Africa...is pharmaceutical companies donating masses of ivermectin to human aid agencies (at no cost to them or the recipients) and aid agencies going around yearly to villages in Bumfark, Kenya and handing the adults and kids their yearly dose of ivermectin. (Yes, pretty much entire villages are treated in the exact same way that farmers treat their cattle for worms or you treat your dog or cat with heartworm preventative. Using the same goddamn drug. Avermectins have revolutionised the hell out of PREVENTING worm infections.)

17) Yaws was never terribly common outside of tropical regions (and still isn't), is a treponemal disease that's fairly easy to treat, and pretty much became an orphan disease in the 50s due to a MASSIVE treatment campaign when it was found that the newer, safer antisyphilitic drugs worked very well in treatment of yaws.

18) Typhus is generally a disease of wartime conditions, and is largely preventable by treatment of the lice and mites that cause it--and most of the treatments are made by pharmaceutical companies. (Again, one of the New Hotnesses in this--good old ivermectin.)

19) Leprosy is an odd bird in that only approximately 5 percent of humans are actually susceptible, but the development of drugs by pharmaceutical companies has literally enabled the old leper colonies to be shut down (where persons with leprosy were condemned to die--quarantine laws demanded it, in part because it was thought leprosy was far more contagious than it actually is). The big miracle drug has been dapsone, which is now (and I'm sure you're noticing a bit of a trend here...) provided free of charge to all persons diagnosed with leprosy by its manufacturer as part of a compassionate care program; the other miracle drug was the stuff of nightmares in the 60s (thalidomide) which has found new life because it can help prevent some of the nerve damage caused by certain forms of leprosy.
 
2012-12-25 11:55:13 AM

It's Me Bender: show me: How about we just call it Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming?

Know how I know you're from Missouri?


Because my Fark handle is show me?

/haven't a clue ;^)
 
Displayed 134 of 134 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report