What is Digg?Sponsored by Guitar Center
When Heavy-handed Hints Fail--Guitar Center Wishlist Posters view!
guitarcenter.com - Cool personalized designs send a friendly reminder that a new Stratocaster would rock, thanks.
148 Comments
- DidntYouHear, on 10/12/2007, -2/+94Someone call the Gates Foundation. I heard they have a few dollars to donate to a worthy cause.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+67**Dugg for the hope of all cancer victims**
- sockpuppets, on 10/12/2007, -1/+48Sadly a cure for impatience has yet to be found.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -22/+65How sad that in a world where cures are found, they are often disposed in favour of treatments that do not offer a 'permanent' solution to patients.
These pharmaceutical organisations are causing people like my grandfather, uncles, relatives, and most importantly everyone else in the world to lose their lives just so they can profit.
I'm not religious, but I do believe in a greater judgement that awaits those who do this. - Ramtech, on 10/12/2007, -1/+43Not a bad idea... good thinking...
http://www.gatesfoundation.org/AboutUs/WorkingWithUs/ContactUs/
Everyone should call or send an email... - catalysis, on 10/12/2007, -6/+47@gxcdesign
The pharmaceutical companies have saved countless lives. The problem is that if one invests hundreds of millions in clinical testing and development, another can just take all that work and start selling it as their own. I don't understand why you can't see how this works and how IP protection is responsible for the amazing cures we have today. This case is why we have academics and, if this is a viable drug, it will eventually be tested for human use by that route. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+41Why the hell does everyone think that big pharma is out to kill everyone?
I work in an academic hospital and we get most of most our money from the government. The Pharm companies CANNOT block research. They will research their own thing but if this works, university hospitals will do the research and use the medicine and pharma will NOT play a role in this matter. - briancarnell, on 10/12/2007, -1/+33"Big pharma will buy the patent, destroy it, and continue to shoot radiation at people."
RTFA...the drug in question has been around for a long time and, hence can't be patented. The problem is not that a pharma company will buy it and destroy it, but that no pharma company is willing to fund the tests necessary to bring it to market as a treatment for cancer because it couldn't make any money on it (since it would not be able to prevent other companies from immediately producing the drug as well).
Either the government needs to fund research; private charities need to do so; or there needs to be a mechanism to grant companies market exclusivity if they do follow up on these sorts of drugs. - swOhio, on 10/12/2007, -1/+23I put in my 2 cents, thanks for the idea "didntyouhear" and the link "ramtech"
Dear Gates foundation,
I'm just your avererage joe, but like many people you've probably received emails from today, I stumbled upon an article talking about the findings of doctors from the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada.
This is a link to that article; http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn10971
If you read the article, it talks about an already existing drug that is inexpensive, not patented, and uniquely interacts with cancerous cells. I'll let the contents of the article speak for itself but I thought that this would be something of interest to your program for a couple of reasons.
The drug in question is incredibly simple, inexpensive, and it isn't patented so I believe there isn't much in the way of motivation for large corporations to fund the expensive trials needed to push research forward. Whether or not this is an answer to cancer, obviously no one knows but just from this article it seems incredibly promising.
I have absolutely zero affiliation with any of the parties involved and I'm not trying to suggest what the best bet is for finding a cure, I'm just asking that maybe someone spends 5 minutes looking into this possibility. If this shows promise after a bit of investegating, then dig deeper. If not, then that's that.
Either way I think that the implications of this article falls into your statement on World Health:
"Research to develop health solutions that are effective, affordable, and practical"
and that it's alteast worth a look. I'd hate for something of this importance to fall to through the cracks and be delayed even a day if it really has the potential to make such a large difference.
I appreciate the time you took to read this email, and the things you are doing for the people of the world, thank you.
Sincerely,
Zack
Feel free to just copy this(change the name at the end) and send it to info@gatesfoundation.org
or write your own letter. - keyj63, on 10/12/2007, -0/+21This is my first digg comment ever. I just wanted to say I also sent the gates foundation an email and dugg the story.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+23I will do as I hope others will. Diggers, you all know what we do to servers on a daily basis. We destroy them with vast numbers. Now lets conquer other areas of this world. Diggers for Cancer cure!
- brendandonhue, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19Anyone else actually read the article and see that it's probably a good thing it isn't patented?
- jotux, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16"Big pharma will buy the patent"
It isn't patented, so what exactly are they going to buy? Maybe try reading the articles you comment on, they usually have interesting and useful information. - mutatron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15It isn't patentable, it's a pretty simple molecule that's used for other things too: CHCl2COOH. I'd hesitate to even call it a drug, more like an industrial chemical, you could probably make it in your kitchen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dichloroacetate - nixr, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15I also sent an email to the Gates Foundation.
Greetings,
My name is Jason and I am a 33 year old Network Analyst and I live in Manchester, New Hampshire. I recently stumbled upon an article at NewScientist.Com that discusses the research conducted by Evangelos Michelakis of the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada involving the use of a cheap and unpatented drug called dichloroacetate (DCA) to fight cancer cells. The drug has had very good success at killing off most types of cancer cells while leaving normal cells unharmed in the process. I and many others believe this drug could possibly eliminate the threat of cancer in our lifetime. The problem is that because the drug is not patented pharmaceutical companies will likely not be interested in funding the human trials to see if the drug works as they stand to not profit from the investment.
I am writing to the Gates Foundation to make a simple request. I urge the Foundation to investigate Dr. Evangelos Michelakis' work. If the Gates Foundation finds merit in Dr. Michelakis' findings then I ask that you take the appropriate next steps. I would be a terrible thing if the cure for this devastating disease were delayed for even one extra day simply because it wasn't profitable to fund the trials. The Gates Foundation can really make a difference in this endeavor. All I ask is that you look into it.
I do not represent any organization nor do I have any affiliation with with the University of Alberta in Edmonton. I am merely a concerned citizen of the global community trying to raise awareness of a potential cure for a horrible disease.
Thank You very much for your time.
Sincerely,
Jason
I don't intend to stop there. I am going to contact as many different people and organizations as I can regarding this issue and I urge everyone reading this article to do the same. It took me 5 minutes to write that letter. Five minutes to help potentially save someone's life is a worthwhile investment. Do it. Put down the Wii controller and just write the damn email. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14Pharm companies do not sit on patents. Once they patent a chemical compound, they have set number of years to develop it, test it and then sell it before the patent runs out. Sitting on it means they have less time to sell the drug.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15Fascist: "...and continue to shoot radiation at people."
Are you saying that radiation therapy doesn't work? Then you're an idiot. It works and save lives so before you speak against things you don't understand, go read a little. - cliffzdude, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15There are plenty of drugs that have been tested via academia over the years. Such research would be a coup for a medical research university, if this does indeed show promise it will be tested and produced. Academia works very well with for profit drug companies every day, often bringing drugs to light, funding testing and doing most of the work required.
I have mixed emotions...
As the son of a man who died an early death due to cancer; dugg.
As a person who feels using good news as tool to push a particular sentiment; not dugg.
The digg wins, for the promise this drug holds. - Jelloyeti, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13No, it's really not "big news" just yet.
I can't even tell you how many compounds will completely, irreversibly annihilate cancer cells in dishes or animal models, the number is easily in the thousands.
Go ahead, digg me down. I work in cancer research, I would be just as happy as anyone else if this really turned out to be a cancer cure all, but the fact of the matter is that cancer isn't one disease, though the article makes it out to be.
If it is as promising as some think, then it won't be held back from human trials, EVEN THOUGH "Big Pharma" can't reap huge profits from it. We run trials outside of the "Big Pharma" umbrella all the time, believe it or not, they don't actually run the world.
Also, not all cancer cells get their energy through glycolysis, the mutations in cellular lineages that cause tumor formation in the first place are not necessarily (or principally) hypoxia induced.
I'm SOOOOO tired of cancer being cured every week on digg, really. - qbyte, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11My dad died of a brain tumor.I hope that all of these negative comments are proven wrong.
- Odweaver, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11T.I.N.C.
There Is No Cabal
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There_Is_No_Cabal - nfulton, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Dichloroacetate: A Pro-Apoptotic Agent for Treatment of Human Cancer http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:MbuFzGoemc8J:www.flintbox.com/technology.asp%3FPage%3D978%26ShowAll%3Don+Dichloroacetate:+A+Pro-Apoptotic+Agent+for+Treatment+of+Human+Cancer&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1
Summary
Quick description: University of Alberta researchers have discovered that dichloroacetate (DCA) is an effective pro-apoptotic anti-cancer agent. It is an orally-available, inexpensive small molecule, which has shown little or no toxicity at therapeutic doses. DCA alone blocks tumor growth but it is possible that through the reversal of the apoptosis-resistance state, DCA may effectively be used in a combination therapy with other pro- apoptotic agents.
- pabloD, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11That's where Bill & Melinda come in. . .
- scabbers, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13I hear America can dig up $500,000,000,000 for all kinds of crazy ventures...
- GhostToon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9I figure it wouldn't hurt to take some time out of my day and send an e-mail so I did. Hope others decide to as well. If this really could cure cancer that would be awesome. I wish more was known about it in the 90's when my grandfather died of cancer.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Uh, no.
Pangamic Acid = Dimethylglycine
Dichloroacetate (DCA) != Dimethylglycine (DMG)
http://pdrhealth.com/drug_info/nmdrugprofiles/nutsupdrugs/dim_0097.shtml
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dichloroacetate - nfulton, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Actually, you might also be interested in
Laboratory Study Shows Measles Vaccine May Offer Novel Approach For Treating Lymphoma
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2001/06/010611072804.htm
Harnessing The Measles Virus To Attack Cancer
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=55602
Monkey Virus May Hold Clue to Blood Cancer
http://www.cancerwise.org/may_2004/display.cfm?id=BAA24D74-022E-43AD-834603B86917533F&method=displayFull&color=green - jarinudom, on 03/31/2008, -4/+12Sounds like a lot of diggers have been watching too many late night Kevin Trudeau coral calcium ***** commercials
- DrDigg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8"Canada, and his colleagues tested DCA on human cells cultured outside the body and found that it killed lung, breast and brain cancer cells, but not healthy cells."
Key part of that sentence...outside the body. Cell culture lines are notorious for showing results which do not translate in vivo. Not worth getting excited over yet. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10Let me repeat myself. Big Drug companies CANNOT block research since they do not own all the researchers in the US and the US government funds most of the independent research so back off the conspiracy theory *****.
- Takteek, on 10/12/2007, -8/+16^^ For anyone who hasn't seen that documentary, I recommend you rent it ASAP. It goes through the history of corporations and shows how giant companies have acquired the rights of US citizens, but without the morals of a human being. It's a must see.
- Jelloyeti, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11Dear Dumb Ass,
There is no patent to be purchased. - aristotle1990, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11"These pharmaceutical organisations are causing people like my grandfather, uncles, relatives, and most importantly everyone else in the world to lose their lives just so they can profit."
You well understand that without the companies, your relatives wouldn't have the drugs they'd need to prolong their lives. Just check out Europe; the power hungry anti-monopolists have so destroyed the notion of free enterprise and intellectual property that there's no impetus to continue research, and it shows - there's a reason why the new, powerful drugs are being developed in America.
Anyway, this sounds pretty neat; however, you must realize that this was administered in very small doses to rats. We have no evidence that it works on cancer cells in humans yet, and that's why I want research on this to progress as much as the next guy. - LeDave, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6ok I sent the foundation an email. Hope it helps.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5A quick look at the MSDS sheet for dichloroacetate reveals that it is itself a carcinogen:
"confirmed animal carcinogen with unknown relevance to humans"
So whats the deal? - ngsayjoe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5>>>The pharmaceutical companies have saved countless lives. The problem is that if one invests hundreds of millions in clinical testing and development, another can just take all that work and start selling it as their own. I don't understand why you can't see how this works and how IP protection is responsible for the amazing cures we have today.
Say this to the open-source zealots too.
The commercial software companies have ease countless lives. The problem is that if one invests hundreds of millions in software research and development, another can just take all that work and start selling it as their own. I don't understand why you can't see how this works and how IP protection is responsible for the amazing applications we have today. - IchiroBoston, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Big Pharma is not the bad guy here, the reality is that they are a business. Of course they are going to make decisions on financial reasons. The amount of money big pharma dumps into drug discovery is amazing, especially with low percentage of drugs that actually make it to market. But without big pharma we would be in real trouble. I hope everyone realizes how your current standard of living has been affected due to "Big-Pharma" I can't even count how many example where a drug has saved my life and lives of other people I know.
This discovery is a big deal and I hope someone like the Gates Foundation will help fund this, which may give enough data for big pharma to bring a miracle drug to market. - Godel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6RTFA, that is exactly what this drug does.
- Vash265, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4To whomever mentioned big tobacco, I think you're actually on the right thought process. Big tobacco has the MOST to lose to cancer economically. They're killing their own customers, so it would certainly be in their best interest to keep them alive any way they could....and that includes killing off cancer. I'm not saying smoking still wouldn't be a disgusting habit and have a poor effect on your health, but the people who would do it would be able to keep on doing it with out worrying about lung cancer. If we should be lobbying for anyone's help, it's probably theirs. They owe us one(or a few million) anyway.
- RedViper1999, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Its stuff like this that should have 4000+ dig. Its a pity not more people are digging this, the more people who know the better.
- zanzzz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4People have to understand that big Pharma exist for one thing and that is to make money! Drugs are expensive to test and get approved so treatments that can't be patented and have no profitable upside are simply not pursued. If you were a corporation that invested millions into testing, approving, and marketing a proprietary patented substance and someone else came along with a cheap "open source" treatment you would not be pleased. Clearly a corporation will take competitive actions to protect themselves. These corporations are interested in finding drug "treatments" not cures. For years this industry has supported more regulation of vitamin and herbal supplements that threaten their profits. Improper "studies" are used to deride health claims while the true dangers of prescription drugs are often downplayed. The pervasive influence on medical opinion and regulation in the United States by these very wealthy corporations should not be dismissed.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Rent?
how about a Torrent for "the corp"
(Seed while you watch please!)
http://thepiratebay.org/tor/3561598/THE_CORPORATION_Filmmakers___Official_Download_Edition_-_I - spect3r, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5info@gatesfoundation.org
there you go - Shade00a00, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Actual university article link :
http://www.expressnews.ualberta.ca/article.cfm?id=8153 - nixr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Write them an email. It takes 5 minutes of your time.
- the1rave, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Let's all clam down a little. Until human trials are conducted and extensively reviewed, the potential of this or any drug needs to be taken with a grain of salt. I can only hope that the trials are conducted thoroughly, ethically and reported truthfully by phar-coms interested in its approval.
Vioxx
Zyprexa
Celebrex
Bextra
Baycol
Avandia
Paxil
All either insufficiently studied prior to reporting findings, or side-effects downplayed to gain governmental approval. - fasda, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2What I don't believe you understand is that you said 2 different chemicals were the same. Names are very important in chemistry as they tell the EXACT composition since the have different names that means dichloroacetate != Vitamin B15. Secondly the B15 aka B17 aka laetrile myth was tested and was found to form Cyanide.
http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/reprint/32/5/1121.pdf - arcangelgabriel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4For Cynthia's sake, let's get this going.
1957-2006 - tsaylor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Very interesting information about the way cancer cells work.
- evodevo1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Somehow I have a feeling that this is hyped up, much in the same way many tech toys get hyped up. Unfortunately science is also a human enterprise and subject to the same faults as any other human enterprise. Although I did not read the original paper which is in "Cancer biology", this seems to be too good to be true. Also, if it is really that good, it would be published in a 1st tier journal such as Science or Nature. Look at his publication record here: http://www.ualberta.ca/PERINATAL/Investigators/michelakis.htm
you see that only one publication is in a decent journal (PNAS, #15) and he is only the 3rd author! A publication in a crappy journal from a third rate lab, I would be a little skeptical. Better cancer labs will pick up on the research if it is really that promising. -
Show 51 - 100 of 150 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is