A cure for cancer

Normally, a story concerning big pharmaceutical companies keeping a lid on some cancer killing wonder drug would appeal directly to my inner conspiracy theorist. Now that it's been swirling around the 'net for a few days, I'm seeing some articles pointing out the ridiculousness of the response of some bloggers to this article. I have to agree with them.

Here's how the whole thing has played out so far

1. The original article is something like the following:

   New drug, dichloroacetate (DCA), did great in tests on mice, killing cancerous cells, but leaving healthy cells. Pharma companies unlikely to pay for human testing (next step in finding potential of the drug) because the drug isn't patented.



2. The blogging world interprets:

   BIG PHARMA KEEPS CANCER CURE QUIET! OMG!! PHARMA IS TEH SUXORS!!!



3. Latest, logical responses:

   1) Cancer is not a single disease 2) Plenty of drugs that show promise in mice fail in human testing 3) Kill some cancerous cells, strong cells continue and multiple (like natural selection/evolution only smaller. Final Point - If it works, pharma companies will find a way to make money off of it. Change it a little, patent and sell.