- Joined
- Dec 1, 2010
- Messages
- 61,709
- Reaction score
- 32,368
- Location
- El Paso Strong
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Really? A 4 year old article?
That's ridiculous. The study is still in its early stages and shouldn't be discounted yet. It is certainly news worthy.
That's ridiculous. The study is still in its early stages and shouldn't be discounted yet. It is certainly news worthy.
In the discussion section of the paper, the authors conclude with the following statement:
"Our work … offers a tantalizing suggestion that DCA may have selective anticancer efficacy in patients. The very recent report of the first randomized long-term clinical trial of oral DCA in children with congenital lactic acidosis (at doses similar to those used in our in vivo experiments) showing that DCA was well tolerated and safe (Stacpoole et al., 2006) suggests a potentially easy translation of our work to clinical oncology." (Emphasis mine)
In other words, the authors are saying that in their opinion these experiments in the lab and rats suggests that DCA may be a simple, effective treatment for cancer and we should move forward with clinical trials based solely on their theory and their results.
DCA is an organic chemical that causes liver cancer in laboratory mice when put in their drinking water.
It is not nontoxic. It is a byproduct of another chemical called trichloroethylene (TCE), which has been a source of concern as a cancer-causing agent for some time.
Here is what the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry has to say about TCE:
"HIGHLIGHTS: Trichloroethylene is a colorless liquid which is used as a solvent for cleaning metal parts. Drinking or breathing high levels of trichloroethylene may cause nervous system effects, liver and lung damage, abnormal heartbeat, coma, and possibly death."
So before you start going out and adding DCA to your drinking water to prevent cancer, a degree of caution would be very prudent at this point.
It is way too soon to know whether this is a cancer treatment breakthrough or an urban legend or something in between.
I am acutely aware that there are cancer patients out there who are fighting every day for their survival, hoping that there is one last chance to get a treatment that may prolong or save their lives.
For some of you out there to inappropriately make them feel that DCA is the answer to their prayers based on this single early-stage report in a medical research journal is, in my opinion, not acceptable at best -- and despicable at worst.
How much of your money have you spent to bring this miracle to the people that need it? None you say because you want to maintain your life style? Well shouldn't you be arrested and executed?This is why government funding is so very important in the medical field.
Should companies bury cures to maintain profit on purpose, the CEO's of those companies should be arrested and executed in my opinion.
A little too regressive for some people? :lol:
I could live with it.
Pharmaceutical companies just like any other company exist to make profits. A cancer cure would put a huge dent in their profits.
Hmm. Science by press release instead of peer review, talks about cancer as if it were a single disease, and a conspiracy theory about Big Pharma.
Also, a biology-minded friend of mine read the description of how the treatment works and said "This is pure gibberish."
Ohh, well you will have to have your bio-friend come here and explain why "This is pure gibberish." Otherwise we will have stay with the facts and laugh you off.
this thread has centered on a conspiracy that evil greedy capitalist pigs are preventing a cure from getting exposure because it would cut into profits.
and i agree, it is ridiculous.
Is it so hard to believe that profit is more important than human life? People don't care about each other for the most part. Now, perhaps the science is a bit off, but it has been shown to reduce tumors in some instances. Who knows. With some more time and research, it could make a difference. But no one would make money so. . .
Is it so hard to believe that profit is more important than human life? People don't care about each other for the most part. Now, perhaps the science is a bit off, but it has been shown to reduce tumors in some instances. Who knows. With some more time and research, it could make a difference. But no one would make money so. . .
If no one made money from things that weren't under patent protection, many of the things you take for granted, wouldn't exist at all.
You'd have no access to all the foods, chemicals and the multitude of things that no longer have patent protections.
The blind hyper partisan hand wringing in this thread is despicable.
And why is that a bad thing?
Most of the random stuff in our lives is not really necessary or needed.
And why is that a bad thing?
Most of the random stuff in our lives is not really necessary or needed.
That is a stupid argument.
If no one made money from things that weren't under patent protection, many of the things you take for granted, wouldn't exist at all.
You'd have no access to all the foods, chemicals and the multitude of things that no longer have patent protections.
it isnt so hard to believe some people would do such a thing. Say 20 or so people learn of this great new idea, but also know it would harm them financially. sure, they might all agree to keep quiet.
but we aren't talking about 20 people. We are talking about mankind. This study has been in peer review journals. it's ludicrious.
And why is that a bad thing?
Most of the random stuff in our lives is not really necessary or needed.
People are motivated purely by profit, what they can gain from it, not by what could benefit mankind. That was my point, and I doubt it was a stupid argument-especially since you practically made my point. As far as the things I take for granted, personally, I feel like the world would be better off without the materialism.
I didn't make any point for you.
There would be a demand for the product and there are means to produce it.
It's still a dumb argument because it's based on....nothing.
There is no reason someone wouldn't produce such a product.
All the people that reject materialism, still practice materialism. :lol:
Well, we know you have a computer or some such similar device, so...And yet such products are still being suppressed in favor of oil. And simply claiming that an argument is dumb and based on nothing doesn't make it so.
i doubt you have any idea what I or others here "practice."
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?