With the millions and millions of pounds being pumped in to cancer research, are we actually any closer to finding a cure?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8201376.stm
Might be some sort of breakthrough..
A cure for cancer is like asking x+y =z what is z without knowing x and y. There are many forms and causes of cancer and I doubt there will ever be a single cure .
Quote from: Gnevin on August 15, 2009, 06:12:19 PM
A cure for cancer is like asking x+y =z what is z without knowing x and y. There are many forms and causes of cancer and I doubt there will ever be a single cure .
Exactly right. There will be no cure for cancer as a whole. I think stem cell research is the best hope for it though.
Quote from: Gnevin on August 15, 2009, 06:12:19 PM
A cure for cancer is like asking x+y =z what is z without knowing x and y. There are many forms and causes of cancer and I doubt there will ever be a single cure .
X+y = 21 gnevin....do you know nothing.... ;)
Causing cancer is what the doctors have down to a fine art.
Quote from: Capt Pat on August 15, 2009, 11:18:04 PM
Causing cancer is what the doctors have down to a fine art.
Thats a big statement if ever there was. Care to elaborate ???
Quote from: Capt Pat on August 15, 2009, 11:18:04 PM
Causing cancer is what the doctors have down to a fine art.
aye, for about 5 years and then they realise that the supposed cure/alternative was doing more harm than the original.
When there is a cure for cancer it is unlikely that any of us who would be unfortunate enough to need it would get it. For example, there are many forms of treatment for cancer but the HSE are not going to stock their stores with the most expensive form of that treatment at all times. By this I mean that an ordinary Joe Soap is not going to get for example the best form of Chemo (which can be in tablet form, drip form or radiated,) like lets say he would get in the Mayo Clinic and all the patient is told is that you are "going on six months of chemo" but very seldom is the patient told exactly what would be the best chemo as opposed to what they are getting, mainly because they wouldn't know anyway. A few years ago I had two ops for the dreaded C and the chemo doctor 'told me' he was 'running a trial drug alongside the standard chemo' for a six month period. I told him he wasn't. He told me to go away and come back in a week and decide. I went back a week later and said I was taking neither the standard or the trial and two years later I got the all clear - touch wood. The point is that if I had taken the trial drug it would have become an overnight success in terms of treatment for C if similar statistics were relied upon, just like the little mouse who has now made the news. Most every year there is an announcement that a cure has been found but for my tuppence worth it will be a while longer but cancer research must be supported.
Quote from: Bud Wiser on August 16, 2009, 12:03:29 PM
The point is that if I had taken the trial drug it would have become an overnight success in terms of treatment for C if similar statistics were relied upon, just like the little mouse who has now made the news
Hardly the whole reason for having drug trials is to weed out the statical anomaly such as the above
I think they're plan is to get us to stop eating everything...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8202188.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8202188.stm)
::)
Come on pints, processed meat is bad for you, kids getting a taste for it is not good for them. No harm in trying to get parents to encourage the kids to eat well
Quote from: gerrykeegan on August 17, 2009, 04:01:23 PM
Come on pints, processed meat is bad for you, kids getting a taste for it is not good for them. No harm in trying to get parents to encourage the kids to eat well
I agree but nearly every week we've got something in the news that you're not suppose to eat because it gives you cancer.
It never seems to cross anyone's minds btw that people buy processed meat because it's cheaper, who'd buy processed meat if they could afford better quality stuff?
Who says its cheaper, its certianly a less hassle but not cheaper. Cooking a ham at home would be tons cheaper than buying the processed stuff
Quote from: gerrykeegan on August 17, 2009, 04:23:59 PM
Who says its cheaper, its certianly a less hassle but not cheaper. Cooking a ham at home would be tons cheaper than buying the processed stuff
You can buy packs of ham, with maybe 20 slices, for a couple of pound. 2 quid wouldnt go far if you were buying unprocessed ham and cooking it yourself.
Tesco Greenfarm processed ham €28.50 per kg
Superquinn fresh ham €4.79 per kg
Quote from: gerrykeegan on August 17, 2009, 04:44:40 PM
Tesco Greenfarm processed ham €28.50 per kg
Superquinn fresh ham €4.79 per kg
The study said that people should not eat bacon as well as ham. It is to do with the curing (for the bacon anyhow) not with it being processed.
Tomorrow someone else will say cheese and milk are bad for you, next week it could be spagetti hoops and that we will all live to 150 as long as we eat plenty of ham and bacon.
Quote from: gerrykeegan on August 17, 2009, 04:44:40 PM
Tesco Greenfarm processed ham €28.50 per kg
Superquinn fresh ham €4.79 per kg
That doesnt sound quite right!
All I know is I can go in to tesco or sainsburys here and if I wanted ham for lunch my options are a packet of 20 slices of ham for maybe 1 or 2 quid, a tin of ham for about a quid, a pack of about 10 slices of ham at about 2.50 (generally my option) or buy a joint of ham, think the small ones are about a fiver, take it home and cook it and it would do a couple of days for sandwiches. So obviously the more processed and filled with water the food is the cheaper it is.
I think chicken is already on the list of cancer causing food maiden.
I sometimes wonder if the health industry really wants to find the cure to Cancer? They make a lot of money on treating symptoms of this horrible disease and would surely miss out on this if they discovered a cure.
Quote from: The Iceman on August 17, 2009, 04:56:09 PM
I sometimes wonder if the health industry really wants to find the cure to Cancer? They make a lot of money on treating symptoms of this horrible disease and would surely miss out on this if they discovered a cure.
Don't think we are supposed to drink beer, eat meat, have saturated fats from butter etc, bread has some preservative which is bad for you ... I think I will just take my chances.
Quote--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote from: Bud Wiser on August 16, 2009, 12:03:29 PM
The point is that if I had taken the trial drug it would have become an overnight success in terms of treatment for C if similar statistics were relied upon, just like the little mouse who has now made the news
Hardly the whole reason for having drug trials is to weed out the statical anomaly such as the above
Tried to translate this a few times but still can't get the point you are trying to make.
Maybe I wasn't clear in my post either but just to make myself clearer:
There is nothing wrong with drug trials, without them there would be no drugs. There are two reasons I would undergo a drug trial, one if I was asked to do so first instead of sneaking it in without telling me. The second reason would be if I was sure that what I was undertaking would be some help and I can't see how it could have been a help if it was ,as the chemo doctor said, "being run alongside a standard drug" and regardless of whether I took it ior not the result would have been the same. The second thing is, I was referring to the cure for cancer as in the thread title, not cancer prevention and, it is my opinion, that the drugs companies have sales reps on the road and some are good to the extent that some GPs are in their pockets in prescribing medicines on the same drug companies notepads that were provided along with the new ballpoint pen and the round of golf in return for their support. When it comes to the drugs used in cancer treatment, and for that matter, how operations are carried out for cancer treatment there is a wide gap between what you will get from one country to another, or in our case, from one county to another. Some hospitals have surgeons who can do lapriscopical (keyhole) surgery and some have not but you takes your chances. Anyway, its not something I want to get dragged into but that is my opinion anyway.
There is a simple cure, put your entire head into a full bucket of water 3 times but only take it out twice! ;)
I will not give money to people collecting 'for Cancer'. My mother died of Cancer. Such is life.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8211543.stm
Pints Another one for you!
Just don't break out the candles when you're sitting down to that romantic ham sandwich. Everything in moderation is the key I think.
Quote from: Tony Baloney on August 21, 2009, 10:15:50 AM
Everything in moderation is the key I think.
Everything? That's a bit extreme.
QuoteEverything in moderation is the key I think.
All things in moderation including moderation ;)