Its a difficult subject.
It really isn't for a moral person.Of course not on an individual level. We would all want a family member or ourselves cured of cancer, but so would everyone else on the planet.
Imagine how many extra people would be on the earth in a decade if a cure was found.
Its a difficult subject.
Mother Nature won't be stopped. If we cured cancer and stopped millions of deaths per year something else would kill off humans. In the end there is a balance before the ant farm collapses on itself. Just think about this. The earth is a sphere and below the crust is oil, mines, gas etc... Once the earth is bled dry, what will fill those gaps? Eventually the surface will collapse inwards.Didn't we already stop/slow countless deaths with the HIV/AIDS cocktails that are out there?
Another dumbass thread that will get "10 pages, easy" with 5 of them coming from Shizzo. Then Shizzo will congratulate himself on being able to "bring the traffic" and once again crown himself king of Getbig or something equally retarded.Its called being active in the discussion. Why do you get angry about what I write?
Boring, boring, boring.
Why not? It's not like its eating into any of their existing market share or diverting revenue stream from anything else.
Now say they found a cure for people to be able to quit smoking or hard recreational drugs instantly.......whole different ball game then.
Would it boost the economy, or actually hurt it? The healthcare industry would be massively affected.
It would boost the worldwide economy on a scale never seen before with unprecedented demand for the drugs and save billions in health service costs.
Would create millions of jobs worldwide.
Can only be a good thing.
Giant pharmaceutical companies have probably already done matrix's on this shit.
Why not? It's not like its eating into any of their existing market share or diverting revenue stream from anything else.
Now say they found a cure for people to be able to quit smoking or hard recreational drugs instantly.......whole different ball game then.
You are under the assumption that the cure would be in pill form or somehow have to be re administered more than once.
Everything is governed by the laws of supply and demand in economics.
Lets take a very simplistic viewpoint not even taking into account whole bunch of shit and do some basic maths.
a) Take the net number of total cancer suffers who would be saved worldwide each year, lets call this x.
b) Multiply that number by the sum total of revenue created for them purchasing the drug each year (which would be huge, think how much HIV pills cost) call this y
c) Subtract above number by the number of cancer wards that would become obsolete (who are by in large subsidized by your tax dollars anyway) account for lost revue in jobs in relation to taxpayer money saved for funding such places and those jobs in the first place and figure out net difference.
d) Add in revenue streams created and new jobs created for administrating/distributing/marketing the drugs.
Your creating money and saving money, its a win win.
I am not even taking into account at this stage indirect benefits such as the longer people live, the more products and services they need, the more money they would have to spend on paying tax....blah blah blah....you see where I am going with this.!The longer people live, the more strain it will put on taxpayers and families needing to care for the elderly.
Sympathy bump to help garner more responses, so it can reach 10 pages.
Doing God's work. You're a noble and honorable man.
You want the cancer rates to drop, stop smoking, stop eating GMOs, stop getting most of the vaccines, stop drinking the poison water, keep your refined products including sugar to a minimum, exercise and keep your red meat consumption to a minimum. That's where most of your cancers come from. We are out of balance and this is what you get.
Why not? It's not like its eating into any of their existing market share or diverting revenue stream from anything else.
Now say they found a cure for people to be able to quit smoking or hard recreational drugs instantly.......whole different ball game then.
People who believe in one wacky conspiracy theory are very likely to believe in multiple wacky conspiracy theories. The anti vaccine nutjobs are particularly bad. As for "big pharma" not wanting a cure for cancer?! Please... If they can charge a lot of chemotherapy, imagine how much they could charge for a cure. Steve Jobs is a good example. He actually had a type of pancreatic cancer that actually had a decent chance at being controlled if you get surgery early. What did he do? He tried special diets and "natural" treatments. He did this for around 9 months and then when it wasn't working he then said oh shit, I better get the surgery. By then the cancer had spread and he was fucked. Of course we all know though that "cannabis oil" is the magic cure for cancer.
People who believe in one wacky conspiracy theory are very likely to believe in multiple wacky conspiracy theories. The anti vaccine nutjobs are particularly bad. As for "big pharma" not wanting a cure for cancer?! Please... If they can charge a lot of chemotherapy, imagine how much they could charge for a cure. Steve Jobs is a good example. He actually had a type of pancreatic cancer that actually had a decent chance at being controlled if you get surgery early. What did he do? He tried special diets and "natural" treatments. He did this for around 9 months and then when it wasn't working he then said oh shit, I better get the surgery. By then the cancer had spread and he was fucked. Of course we all know though that "cannabis oil" is the magic cure for cancer.
I know its easy to say yes given the amount of people affected by this terrible disease, but would it ultimately doom humanity?
Diseases are nature's way of fighting overpopulation of species.
In 2012, there were an estimated 8.2 million deaths around the world from cancer.
Imagine how many extra people would be on the earth in a decade if a cure was found.
Its a difficult subject.
big pharma doesnt want there to be a cure for cancer.
Quite theHas the cancer rate escalated greatly since the introduction of recombinant DNA procedures? (1980)generalizationperspicacious observation liquid c u n t.
We keep talking about a cure for cancer like it would be a one stop solution for all forms and variations of the disease.
What's this we shit? Read your subject title, pal: "cancer," no s.Tough crowd.
Tough crowd.
Would it boost the economy, or actually hurt it? The healthcare industry would be massively affected.Cancer is big business, don't expect a cure anytime soon.
You could argue that there would be loss of work, due to less demand in the healthcare field, and more people alive to compete for jobs.
As sick as it sounds, death is big business.
I work in big Pharma and I can tell you for a fact, if any of them had a cure, they would release it in a heartbeat. The bonuses for the incumbent CEO, of the company with the cure, would make damn sure it would be released. The stock price would rocket and the company would soon be one of the biggest players in the game (if they weren't already).
These companies think in quarterly earnings, if there is anyway to improve them, they will literally kill their mothers to do it. Holding out on the biggest blockbuster ever..... Only a deluded Hebrew would think that they would do such a thing.
(http://rlv.zcache.com/celebrating_50th_birthday_drink_coasters-r46118f7b7d624b1082c0bdcac35e3d92_x7jy0_8byvr_512.jpg)
That important, huh?Nah, I do it to get under people's skin. It has become a joke to me at this point. :D
I just had a thought shizzo....Why? Cancer is probably one of the last things a person abusing steroids would worry about.
If they found a cure for cancers, steroid abuse would increase exponentially.
You would have huge ass mass monsters everywhere.
Think about it.
The keyword here is abuse. You can die from water poisoning for crying out loud.
Actually your right, I made a dumass post there, nevermind. ;D
Having said that if the same amount of people worldwide abused steroids that smoke or drink I bet substantial portion would get shit like prostate cancer etc.
Why? Cancer is probably one of the last things a person abusing steroids would worry about.
Heart attack, and organ failure would usually come long before that.
If you had cancer, would you want a cure?
Didn`t read thread but thread title is retarded. :(Agreed. Everybody will know someone in their lifetime that gets cancer. Who wouldn't want a cure for cancer. I went to a friends funeral today who died from cancer. She was 43 and left behind 4 children and a husband. Their world has been ripped apart.
Agreed. Everybody will know someone in their lifetime that gets cancer. Who wouldn't want a cure for cancer. I went to a friends funeral today who died from cancer. She was 43 and left behind 4 children and a husband. Their world has been ripped apart.Its a no brainer that society would embrace a cure for cancer. I was referring to the possible economic and environmental issues a cure could pose down the line.
(http://i57.tinypic.com/ddmhwk.gif)
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=564726.0;attach=598182;image)