Effective Cancer Vaccines Will Soon Emerge: Interview With Dr. Herbert Chow, PhD. - Polidicks

[QUOTE=yawmwen;29744315]what diseases do we have cures for? and if a disease does have a cure how many people can access that cure? our system operates on treatment, not curing[/QUOTE] Polio.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;29744315]what diseases do we have cures for? and if a disease does have a cure how many people can access that cure? our system operates on treatment, not curing[/QUOTE] Polio, Smallpox, Measles, Mumbs, Rubella, Chickenpox, partially the Flu, Tetanus, Rabies, would you like me to continue naming every vaccine or are you going to shut up. I hate this ridiculous canard about "Oh they would never let a cure out because it would be more profitable to treat it" because the very existence of vaccines and other cheap preventatives kind of shut that argument down. I'm sure it would be very profitable to treat polio, giving therapy throughout their lives, walking aids, breathing support, but they don't do that. e: One of the most supported causes in international medicine is vaccination of 3rd world countries, as well. So... yeah.

[QUOTE=Xen Tricks;29744884]Polio, Smallpox, Measles, Mumbs, Rubella, Chickenpox, partially the Flu, Tetanus, Rabies, would you like me to continue naming every vaccine or are you going to shut up. I hate this ridiculous canard about "Oh they would never let a cure out because it would be more profitable to treat it" because the very existence of vaccines and other cheap preventatives kind of shut that argument down. I'm sure it would be very profitable to treat polio, giving therapy throughout their lives, walking aids, breathing support, but they don't do that.[/QUOTE] im sorry, what disease have we come up with a cure(that is being used) for in the last 50 years? i shoulda been more specific [editline]10th May 2011[/editline] and you know the fact that we have cures and vaccines for hiv that completely destroy the virus and we have cures for cancer, shuts down the argument that the health industry is out to cure anything

[QUOTE=yawmwen;29744949]im sorry, what disease have we come up with a cure for in the last 50 years? i shoulda been more specific[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.sajei.co.za/index.php/SAJEI/article/view/86[/url] [url]http://thefutureofthings.com/news/1198/new-meningitis-b-vaccine-developed.html[/url] [url]http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CD0QFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdiarrhea.emedtv.com%2Fcholera%2Fcholera-vaccine.html&rct=j&q=recently%20developed%20vaccines&ei=ma3JTfrlAqbV0QHeqMmCCA&usg=AFQjCNET6riMMAYwLk94q8WmPgpWN3aJ6A&sig2=YCR_61MBdzqzMw3trNM9vw&cad=rja[/url] [url]http://www.nesi.be/downloads/capetown/Session%204/P03%20Francis%20Andr%E9.ppt[/url] There's also the chickenpox vaccine, which was introduced when I was a kid, the MMR vaccine which was introduced in the early 90s and is a combination of 3 vaccines thus cutting down the BIG PHARMA profit by 2/3, and Gardasil or whatever the name of the HPV virus vaccine was. e: [url]http://www.physorg.com/news205557043.html[/url] e: The flu vaccine is constantly being worked on with new strains of it coming out every year, the H1N1 vaccine was created... ee: This is just within the past two decades or so. I'm sure I could more than double my results if I looked for things in the 80s, 70s, and 60s [quote][editline]10th May 2011[/editline] and you know the fact that we have cures and vaccines for hiv that completely destroy the virus and we have cures for cancer, shuts down the argument that the health industry is out to cure anything[/QUOTE] What fucking cure for cancer do we have, huh? And where's this cure for HIV?

those diseases are all more profitable to cure anyways i mean chickenpox isnt a life threatening illness that requires lifelong treatment like cancer or hiv and source on mmr cutting profit of the industry by 2/3

[QUOTE=yawmwen;29745094]those diseases are all more profitable to cure anyways i mean chickenpox isnt a life threatening illness that requires lifelong treatment like cancer or hiv and source on mmr cutting profit of the industry by 2/3[/QUOTE] How bout a source on your claim that they're all more profitable to cure? I somehow doubt a $.50 oral vaccine is going to be more profitable than treating someone for even moderately severe disease. And I don't have a source, it's just an obvious fact. Measles vaccine = $10, Mumps vaccine = $10, Rubella vaccine = $10, MMR = $10, bam there goes profit.

[QUOTE=Xen Tricks;29745143]How bout a source on your claim that they're all more profitable to cure?[/quote] thats an obvious fact as well a pharm company makes thousands of dollars per year per patient with aids with how much treatment the person has to go through the cure would have to cost tens of thousands just to recoup that loss [quote]I somehow doubt a $.50 oral vaccine is going to be more profitable than treating someone for even moderately severe disease.[/quote] you cant treat a lot of those illnesses, mumps and measles both either go away pretty quickly or kill the person pretty quickly, it isnt a long drawn out battle like cancer [quote]And I don't have a source, it's just an obvious fact. Measles vaccine = $10, Mumps vaccine = $10, Rubella vaccine = $10, MMR = $10, bam there goes profit.[/QUOTE] il concede that, although there are probably other factors at work with that my stance is firm as far as lifelong diseases such and cancer and hiv go but temporary illnesses and viruses are a whole different cup of tea [editline]10th May 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Xen Tricks;29745025]What fucking cure for cancer do we have, huh? And where's this cure for HIV?[/QUOTE] every fucking year we have a new cure for cancer and iv heard about 3 different hiv cures so far including a vaccine that completely destroys the virus

[QUOTE=yawmwen;29745344]thats an obvious fact as well a pharm company makes thousands of dollars per year per patient with aids with how much treatment the person has to go through the cure would have to cost tens of thousands just to recoup that loss you cant treat a lot of those illnesses, mumps and measles both either go away pretty quickly or kill the person pretty quickly, it isnt a long drawn out battle like cancer il concede that, although there are probably other factors at work with that my stance is firm as far as lifelong diseases such and cancer and hiv go but temporary illnesses and viruses are a whole different cup of tea[/QUOTE] [quote]RESULTS: From the perspective of society, we estimated the average cost per measles case to be US$276, US$307 and US$254 for the NL, the UK and Canada, respectively, and the average cost of adverse events following immunisation per vaccinee to be US$1.43, US$1.93 and US$1.51 for the NL, UK and Canada, respectively[/quote] [url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12241559[/url] [quote]For hospitalized care, the health system spent an average of $71 per episode for pneumonia, $235 for severe pneumonia, and $2,043 for meningitis[/quote] [url]http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hpm.847/abstract?systemMessage=Wiley+Online+Library+will+be+disrupted+14+May+from+10-12+BST+for+monthly+maintenance[/url] Also I'd like to point out the fact that HPV is one of the primary causes of ovarian cancer in women so Gardasil basically functions as a partial ovarian cancer vaccine so there you go. I would also like a source for your absurd claim that we have a cure for HIV and Cancer. The idea that you think we have some actual cure for cancer floating around and the thousands of oncologists in this country aren't scrambling for it and using it immediately, costs be damned, is unbelievably insulting to them and the medical community as a whole. e: [QUOTE=yawmwen;29745344] [editline]10th May 2011[/editline] every fucking year we have a new cure for cancer and iv heard about 3 different hiv cures so far including a vaccine that completely destroys the virus[/QUOTE] It doesn't matter shit what you've heard, do you have any idea how many quack cures for such diseases there are. I don't care if you've heard of a fucking million of them, unless you can actually show me one that's effective and not utter pseudoscience like alkalinity or laetrille, shut up.

hmmm actually i guess your p much right il actually give up the argument turns out the hiv cure i was thinking about is still doing trial testing to be approved, it seemed to fade into obscurity i thought it just disappeared

[QUOTE=yawmwen;29745629]hmmm actually i guess your p much right il actually give up the argument turns out the hiv cure i was thinking about is still doing trial testing to be approved, it seemed to fade into obscurity i thought it just disappeared[/QUOTE] Exactly, that's also often the case. Something will come into testing, the media will hype it as THE CURE FOR CANCER!/AIDS!/SOME OTHER HORRIBLE DISEASE!, it'll turn out to not be very effective in testing or some other issue with the drug and it'll get rejected, it fades out of the public eye, and a year or two later people pick it back up and say Hey there was a cure for cancer but it disappeared! It must be the FDA/Big Pharma/Some other evil group shutting it down for money! :colbert:

[QUOTE=Xen Tricks;29745690]Exactly, that's also often the case. Something will come into testing, the media will hype it as THE CURE FOR CANCER!/AIDS!/SOME OTHER HORRIBLE DISEASE!, it'll turn out to not be very effective in testing or some other issue with the drug and it'll get rejected, it fades out of the public eye, and a year or two later people pick it back up and say Hey there was a cure for cancer but it disappeared! It must be the FDA/Big Pharma/Some other evil group shutting it down for money! :colbert:[/QUOTE] well its hard to figure out when it just fades away with no news article detailing why it isnt being used what are you supposed to think when you hear about a new cure that is supposedly incredibly effective in trials and then suddenly nothing is ever heard about it again

[QUOTE=yawmwen;29745782]well its hard to figure out when it just fades away with no news article detailing why it isnt being used what are you supposed to think when you hear about a new cure that is supposedly incredibly effective in trials and then suddenly nothing is ever heard about it again[/QUOTE] Of course it fades away with no news article, the news doesn't give half a shit if something [I]doesn't[/I] work, it's only when something shows promise that they hype it. And I think "well I guess it actually wasn't very effective after all", I don't jump to "PHARMAAAAA :argh:" immediately. That kind of thinking is what drives the killer alt med industry. I'll wrap this up with one more thought, think about the actual doctors, the people working with families with a dying mother, father, or son, people hurting and grieving over a pernicious disease which, despite their best and most valiant efforts, all too often kills the person in the end. Why would they, of all people, not immediately go for an actual viable cure and use it to prevent years of suffering for millions of people? It's not profitable? Thinking that way demonizes an entire profession, makes out thousands of people to be heartless cruel monsters driven only by profit instead of actual human beings trying desperately to help people. Hell, even beyond just wanting a cure for cancer, they'd give anything for the dozens of promised cures to be real. Every time they lose a patient who decides to buck conventional treatment and go for an alt-med treatment which promises to be a miracle cure, and dies much earlier and much more painfully than they would otherwise, i'm sure they think a little more about the loss than "Oh damn there goes money"

[QUOTE=Xen Tricks;29745925] I'll wrap this up with one more thought, think about the actual doctors, the people working with families with a dying mother, father, or son, people hurting and grieving over a pernicious disease which, despite their best and most valiant efforts, all too often kills the person in the end. Why would they, of all people, not immediately go for an actual viable cure and use it to prevent years of suffering for millions of people? It's not profitable? Thinking that way demonizes an entire profession, makes out thousands of people to be heartless cruel monsters driven only by profit instead of actual human beings trying desperately to help people.[/quote] not really, i never placed blame on the doctors, i placed blame of the pharmaceutical companies which really i would not put them above doing since like all companies are solely driven by profit

[QUOTE=yawmwen;29746261]not really, i never placed blame on the doctors, i placed blame of the pharmaceutical companies which really i would not put them above doing since like all companies are solely driven by profit[/QUOTE] No, by doing that you also place the blame on the doctors. You think that despite their knowledge of an effective cure, they would just allow the pharma companies to shut it down because it's not profitable. If a pharma company ever discarded a miracle cure for money, I can sure as hell guarantee you there'd be some dissent from within the medical community.

News like this always lifts my spirits. I never worried about cancer since I kept hearing about new advances in medical science but now that I've been diagnosed these dudes need to HURRY UP.

[QUOTE=DrMonumbo;29746558]News like this always lifts my spirits. I never worried about cancer since I kept hearing about new advances in medical science but now that I've been diagnosed these dudes need to HURRY UP.[/QUOTE] what do you got?

Wow, this is awesome.

"This is one of the largest molecules ever found in the biological world. Due to its sheer size, it cannot be synthetically made, and can only be harvested from this mollusk. This molecule, which we call KLH, is extremely valuable and can be used in vaccines as well as other therapies." That right there is a VERY questionable statement. The general view is - if nature can produce it, there is a way to synthesise it somewhere in the future/with applied research.

Hope they can start farming them and I really hope this is something I hear about again unlike the many other cure cancer claims.

This might have saved my brother if it had come sooner. :frown:

this sounds too good to be true, especially when paired with "it comes from a rare mollusk and we can't synthesize it and it costs thousands."

About a month too late for my mother.

I imagine production of this would never make be globally available because it would make more money if it was scarce.

[QUOTE=TheFilmSlacker;29743180]If only it had come quicker, it could have saved my grandfather...[/QUOTE] your grandfather would be dead by now anyway I assume

They should genetically engineer really common mollusks to make this molecule