Opening a hypothetical preverbial can of worms

The thread and responses are the proof of the pudding...thus spake Pogo

would you say yea or nay to this...if the center does not hold...victory is nigh...yea or nay...equivocate not...oh yes...it is that simple...all great solutions are...don't ya know...

As we make our trips for treatment from Columbus to Atlanta along I-85, when reaching Newnan, off to the left is a HUGE, brand new, shiny facility recently built by Cancer Treatment Centers of America. We call it the "house that cancer built". When we arrive at Clifton Road, our trip to Winship Cancer is slowed considerably ay another huge facility under construction, right beside our destination...the "house that cancer is building".

My husband and I have talked about all the people who have been involved in his treatment in one manner or another: Phlebotomists, lab techs, doctors, nurses, clerical workers, insurance folks, etc., and what the costs of employing all those folks must be. We have wondered out loud if there were a "cure", would a lot of the people be out of a job? Would the medical community be able to absorb the over-flow? Could the economy stand a "cure"?

We've had countless visits to doctors after the initial attempt at a cure. And, there is no end in sight. If there were an initial cure, all those visits (and corresponding fees) would never have been. Every time we go in, the office is packed.

This doesn't even address Big Pharma. I, unfortunately, have come to think more like Todd. I think there's too much money on the line. I think there will be no cure.

Donna.

I'm going to weigh in here with some other observations...

As has been pointed out "cancer" is not a single disease, it is many diseases, and every organ or system of the body can be affected...with the strange exception of the heart muscle. The only way there could be a cure for cancer is if all cancer(s) have a single cause. Which doesn't appear to be the case.

The second thought is this: what is the definition of cure? We all think we know what it means, but what does it mean, really, and how would you know that an individual...or a population...is cured?

I'm not quite so cynical as Todd or BillyBob. I have my doubts a cure would be suppressed. Personally, I think the underlying issue regarding the elusiveness of a cure has mostly to do with our lack of understanding of what the causes really are. We still don't know what the true triggers are that turn a normal cell into a cancer cell. We have a lot of hints...but not a lot of certainty.

Along those lines, however, and on the subject of suppression of evidence, I have a personal insight there...In the mid 1950's (1955-57) my dad was doing post-doctoral research in Organic Chemistry at Duke University. His team was doing some of the first research into the chemical contents of cigarette smoke. They built the first "smoking machine" to collect the constituents of the smoke and they ran some of the first analyses of it. I know two things about it: one is that at the start of the project, everyone on the team..and their wives...smoked. Within 3 months, they all quit. Two is, as far as I know, that research has never been published.

Halbert,
I have been watching this thread and value all the replies. I am a question asker. I believe that there is value and wisdom in discussion.

To me, cure, means cure. Take a pill and cancer goes away. Better yet, Dr. McCoy used his little doohickey and cancer is gone.

I am not cynical, I am a realist. We live in a capitalist nation and money is God. I just believe that the economy would crash if cancer was cured