Researchers at Stanford might be onto something...

http://nypost.com/2013/03/27/one-drug-to-rule-them-all-researchers-find-treatment-that-kills-every-kind-of-cancer-tumor/

Hopefully they make great progress with that $20 million.

Fact: Breathing is an indicator of cancer.

Here's the latest on it: http://stemcell.stanford.edu/CD47/

(1/14/14) Update on the anti-CD47 cancer therapy clinical trials
Researchers and staff at Stanford are continuing to work hard preparing the groundwork for the clinical trials of our anti-CD47 antibody as a cancer therapy. We are anticipating the start of clinical trials sometime in the first half of this year, though unforeseen delays may yet slow that progress. As we get closer to the start of the clinical trials, we will be posting information about eligibility for the trials and how to apply.
There has been a huge amount of interest in these trials from patients and their families and friends. However, we feel compelled to emphasize that, as is typical of FDA phase I clinical trials, the first tests of this therapy will be very small safety trials involving only a very few patients. Unfortunately, this means only a tiny fraction of those interested will be admitted to the first phase I clinical trials. Accordingly, we are urging patients to continue exploring existing treatments and other clinical trials.

We've heard this many times before and nothing has ever come out of it. The reality is, these research universities make outlandish claims with small data sets to try to get in the media to generate more funding for their research efforts. I don't blame them for doing this, but I also don't believe they've found a cure for cancer or are anywhere close. Cancer is going to be extremely difficult to solve and I would wager it's going to take a couple hundred years to do so.

Nah.
In reading some comments on the Jim Kelly FB page, there already is a cure but you ahve to go to mexico to get it....

There won't be a cure for cancer as cancer is a diverse group of diseases affecting various parts of the body. Earlier detection and better treatments have taken us from any cancer being a virtual death sentence to many forms having a very high cure rate. We're decades (if ever) away from all forms being even close to 100% curable.

sleeper;1596536 wrote:We've heard this many times before and nothing has ever come out of it. The reality is, these research universities make outlandish claims with small data sets to try to get in the media to generate more funding for their research efforts. I don't blame them for doing this, but I also don't believe they've found a cure for cancer or are anywhere close. Cancer is going to be extremely difficult to solve and I would wager it's going to take a couple hundred years to do so.

I know this is extremely cynical, but I have to wonder with all the money invested in cancer specific hospitals, oncology units, cancer research foundations, etc., will a cure EVER be acknowledged? Having lost a loved one to this monster, I sure would hope so, but I'm not optimistic.

I've wondered many times if there will be a cure in my lifetime and as many of you young punks love to remind me, that timeline is ending sooner than I'd like. But when I was a kid Polio scared the hell out of people and I remember lining up by the thousands to take the Sabin vaccine on consecutive Sundays. I hope many of you little dickheads get the same opportunity with a cancer cure... But not all of you and you know who you are.

The "money" argument against suppressing a cancer cure makes 0 sense. You can charge people thousands of dollars for treatment over month or years, or you can charge them tens of thousands for a single pill. Not to mention cancer being one of the leading causes of "premature" death and you're talking even more potential money caring for and treating those people well into old age. Not to mention if someone discovers a cure I'm sure they'd be satisfied to profit just a few hundred million and getting the cure out (and the fame for discovering it) would be powerful incentives. Especially at the university level, I think it's cynical beyond reason that they'd sell it to pharma so it can be buried.

With the advances of gene therapy and stem cell research (among other tech), it would not surprise me in the least if we aren't on the cusp of a cure. I'll actually be fairly shocked if we don't have at least a very effective treatment (say 80%+ success rate) within the next 15-20 years.

But, yeah, they're have been a lot of false hopes that have been pushed over the past decade. Still, both surgery and radiation/chemo have made huge strides over the past 10-20 years, and there's a growing list of types of cancer for which the prognosis is pretty good if caught early.

For what it's worth, I remember hearing about this some time ago...but I see this article is a year old so it leaves you to wonder what developments have happened over the past 12 months and why it wouldn't be gaining steam.

gut;1596565 wrote:The "money" argument against suppressing a cancer cure makes 0 sense. You can charge people thousands of dollars for treatment over month or years, or you can charge them tens of thousands for a single pill. Not to mention cancer being one of the leading causes of "premature" death and you're talking even more potential money caring for and treating those people well into old age. Not to mention if someone discovers a cure I'm sure they'd be satisfied to profit just a few hundred million and getting the cure out (and the fame for discovering it) would be powerful incentives. Especially at the university level, I think it's cynical beyond reason that they'd sell it to pharma so it can be buried.

With the advances of gene therapy and stem cell research (among other tech), it would not surprise me in the least if we aren't on the cusp of a cure. I'll actually be fairly shocked if we don't have at least a very effective treatment (say 80%+ success rate) within the next 15-20 years.

But, yeah, they're have been a lot of false hopes that have been pushed over the past decade. Still, both surgery and radiation/chemo have made huge strides over the past 10-20 years, and there's a growing list of types of cancer for which the prognosis is pretty good if caught early.

Yeah, I dont buy that idea either. It isnt like a cure for cancer wouldnt stop people from ever getting it. They will still get their money, and I am guessing that there wouldnt be just one cure for all cancers.....

gut;1596566 wrote:For what it's worth, I remember hearing about this some time ago...but I see this article is a year old so it leaves you to wonder what developments have happened over the past 12 months and why it wouldn't be gaining steam.

...

gorocks99;1596535 wrote:Here's the latest on it: http://stemcell.stanford.edu/CD47/

like_that;1596568 wrote:...

Thanks....here's the money quote:

"For the last year, many people have been working to make clinical trials possible. We are now hopeful that the first human clinical trials of anti-CD47 antibody will take place at Stanford in mid-2014, if all goes well. Clinical trials may also be done in the United Kingdom."

thavoice;1596567 wrote:Yeah, I dont buy that idea either. It isnt like a cure for cancer wouldnt stop people from ever getting it. They will still get their money, and I am guessing that there wouldnt be just one cure for all cancers.....

There would still be plenty of money to be made, but granted it could potentially be a fraction of what they get. Problem is, once the "formula" is discovered and patent protection runs out, pills can be pretty cheap to produce. And that's assuming this would be the first course of treatment - I'm guessing it might be a "clean-up" approach after surgery and/or chemo, depending on what stage someone is when diagnosed...but before radiation (which is pretty nasty stuff, and can have devastating effects on the brain).

gut;1596565 wrote:

With the advances of gene therapy and stem cell research (among other tech), it would not surprise me in the least if we aren't on the cusp of a cure. I'll actually be fairly shocked if we don't have at least a very effective treatment (say 80%+ success rate) within the next 15-20 years.

Treatment, yes, but not a cure...too much $$$ at stake.

vball10set;1596574 wrote:Treatment, yes, but not a cure...too much $$$ at stake.

If you or your insurance would pay $100k for a 50% effective rate, you'd happily pay $120k for a single pill that works 100%. If a pharma company had a period of exclusivity, the patent would likely be worth tens of billions a year. That pharma company and insurance companies would gladly split the "profits" they'd be taking from hospitals and medical devices.

There's plenty of competition in the industry. Even tacit collusion fails when the gains from "cheating" are so great. Not to mention the fact tremendous savings are on offer from reduced overhead from a pill (i.e. avoiding very costly hospitalization, surgery and ongoing tests, etc...). Everyone can still make their profit on the cancer cure, and then shift resources to other services for an aging population that actually GROW total profits.

vball10set;1596553 wrote:I know this is extremely cynical, but I have to wonder with all the money invested in cancer specific hospitals, oncology units, cancer research foundations, etc., will a cure EVER be acknowledged? Having lost a loved one to this monster, I sure would hope so, but I'm not optimistic.

I'm cynical, but I think a lot of money that goes to research is just rent seeking from non-profit groups. I agree with QCB regarding the cure potential of the disease.

I sure hope so. My gf has kidney cancer and they can't remove it bc her other kidney isn't strong enough. She actually seeks zero treatment for it right now except some pills she has to take but rarely takes them and she's actually gotten better with out the treatment than with. But it would be really nice to have it gone completely instead of worrying every day if she's going to wake up the next morning. She's had some terrible nights before where she stopped breathing for about 20 sec at a time. Cancer blows

I am 4 years cancer free (bladder). Luckily I didnt ignore symptoms as Bladder Cancer has early symptoms ,also lucky to have a great dr.

Cancer is a terrible disease. I still think about and wonder if it will pop up again but I hope this comes to fruition. Ive seen stories like this before so I know not to get too excited.

I'm a Leo.

Hope this helps.

ccrunner609;1596718 wrote:Np pill is gonna cure cancer. Too many types and too many causes.

Stick to dodge ball.

Said and salto sharing accounts. How cute.

said must be a popular guy here.

Crimson streak;1596727 wrote:I sure hope so. My gf has kidney cancer and they can't remove it bc her other kidney isn't strong enough. She actually seeks zero treatment for it right now except some pills she has to take but rarely takes them and she's actually gotten better with out the treatment than with. But it would be really nice to have it gone completely instead of worrying every day if she's going to wake up the next morning. She's had some terrible nights before where she stopped breathing for about 20 sec at a time. Cancer blows

pmoney25;1596739 wrote:I am 4 years cancer free (bladder). Luckily I didnt ignore symptoms as Bladder Cancer has early symptoms ,also lucky to have a great dr.

Cancer is a terrible disease. I still think about and wonder if it will pop up again but I hope this comes to fruition. Ive seen stories like this before so I know not to get too excited.

Wow.. sorry to hear that guys.