450
Limited time offer (startrek.website)
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 158 points 9 months ago

Bullshit

If this was as successful as the tweet pretends there would be no stopping it. The profit potential for a successful cancer cure is astronomical.

[-] Bondrewd@lemmy.world 82 points 9 months ago

This is why you dont get informed from a cropped twitter pic on lemmy.

[-] kakes@sh.itjust.works 11 points 9 months ago

But what if I call it "research" tho?

[-] idunnololz@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] RealFknNito@lemmy.world 109 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

The "it's a conspiracy why we don't have a cancer cure" comments make me want to just lay down and drool on my carpet. It's so fucking retarded it just knocks the brain cells out of me.

load more comments (31 replies)
[-] Jorgelino@lemmy.ml 91 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I'd guess this is what happened:

This comic has more panels but for some reason i can't upload the full version so here's a Link to SMBC Comics

[-] otter@lemmy.ca 35 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Yep, and even more it's

We've destroyed 10 percent of a specific variant of a specific type of cancer in a lab rat's tail

Saying there's a cure for cancer is like saying there's a cure for all "respiratory infection diseases".

[-] PopMyCop@iusearchlinux.fyi 16 points 9 months ago

Or even

We've destroyed 10 percent of a specific variant of a specific type of cancer in a lab rat's tail that was removed from the lab rat's tail and grown in an artificial environment allowing simplistic vectoring methods to apply our solution to the cells.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 41 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Some statistics:

The prognosis for a disease with a treatment that's regular enough to be more profitable than a cure over time, but doesn't cure the underlying disease (or send it into remission), is typically measured in months. For glioblastoma in particular, that average is 12-18 months.

You're not talking about bilking people out of treatment for decades, you're talking about getting maybe a year. Even the most misanthropic pharmaceutical executive (and let's be honest, they all are) would look at that calculation and say "nah, if we can cure it, we can charge way more and people will pay it. People will pay just about anything for a cure."

This is why cancer remission rates have gone up by 30% or more in the past fifty years. It's just way more lucrative to cure a disease than to try to keep people alive, but not cured. That tightrope is just too thin for them to walk reliably and make any profit.

[-] pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online 15 points 9 months ago

Plus, if you're the first pharma company to release a straight up cure, your market valuation is going to go through the roof.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago

It's such a bizarre claim. A close friend of mine had testicular cancer in his 30s. He had chemo and surgery and there has been no reappearance of cancer over 10 years later. He isn't on pharmaceuticals for life. The cancer is essentially cured. Based on this conspiracy theory, chemotherapy would have been suppressed.

[-] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 4 points 9 months ago

yeah, this theory that they "wanna keep us sick so we keep buying symptomatic treatments" ignores the fact that while the industry as a whole might lose a little bit, the company that gets to patent THE CURE FOR FUCKING BRAIN CANCER and then charge whatever they want for it is going to make an assload of money. It starts with the assumption that pharma CEOs are evil, but it doesn't follow through with that assumption. Instead it ends up in a place where pharma CEOs are happy to split a couple billion dollars a year amongst themselves when a cure, should they find it, will end in them getting trillions are for themselves. Everyone knows they want to make as much money as possible, and they're proudly open about that fact. So it rationally follows that they'd pursue a cure and make much, much, much, much more money all for themselves than suppressing a cure and making less money total split over many heads.

[-] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

Exactly right. By all means, go after Big Pharma for the price-fixing, the collusion with insurance companies, the lobbying, the anti-competitive practices, the insufficient research dollars, the monopolistic practices (I could go on)--don't waste your time on this nothingburger.

[-] Exusia@lemmy.world 28 points 9 months ago

"They said it typically takes 10 to 15 years for a new drug to get from the lab to the patient. The team at the University of Findlay is on year two." In 2019

So, still some time to see if it truly was dissappeared or just didn't make the cut.

[-] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 9 months ago
[-] GilgameshCatBeard@lemmy.ca 3 points 9 months ago

Yeah, but don’t let that get in the way of a good ol’ fashioned fist shaking for the kids.

[-] edgemaster72@lemmy.world 20 points 9 months ago

"They have also refined it to ignore healthy brain tissue and focus on the cancer cells."

Uh, I feel like that should've already been covered by the first sentence. Kind of a weird "clarification" to make, and now I'm more worried about its effect on healthy brain tissue than without saying that part.

[-] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 11 points 9 months ago

it's not that strange, chemotherapy for example kills a lot of things that are not cancer

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee 6 points 9 months ago

They're being a little oddly vague. It's all about the amounts of each that they kill. Bleach cures cancer, it just kills the patient too. And there's no such thing as "refining" something that used to kill healthy cells so that it doesn't ever anymore. Maybe they found a variation of the chemical that is strongly biased towards killing cancerous cells but unless that was their targeting mechanism the whole time, they're going to be killing some healthy cells too.

[-] Jackcooper@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

Ya I'm refining my bullet in the brain technique which is known to stop cancer cell growth within just MINUTES. I just need to refine it to ignore healthy brain tissue.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Orbituary@lemmy.world 9 points 9 months ago

My cousin, 15 at the time, died from a rare form of glioblastoma. It wrecked my aunt's family.

[-] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 7 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

They have also refined it to ignore healthy brain tissue

Before they added this feature, it had both a 100% cure rate and a 100% mortality rate.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] randon31415@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 23 Jan 2024
450 points (86.9% liked)

Microblog Memes

5778 readers
1838 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS