On sunday, an article in newspaper Hindustan(Hindi)caught my attention.

Topic-Possible cure of cancer-Cheap and safe- Dichloro Acetate.

Question-Drug is not patented, so private funding( Read  pharmaceutical companies) is not forthcoming for clinical trials.

Also, see following URL

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dichloroacetic_acid#Potential_cancer_applications

Now, we, advocates of Intellectual Properties Rights must ponder over Profit vs ethics all over again.Are companies interested in Health? or only frofit?

Let us have views 

Replying to [sixer]:No Profit is not only motive because it is related to some ones health many of emotions

Dear Sixer,

You award 50 MVPs and make your own posting as Recomended reading, which earns back the 50 MVPs before you even award them.

As you have seen the way Moderators award MVPs for Best Answers, please be more generous with the MVPs for this Question and some of those that require lots of time to research and lay the arguments.

I can answer this question on pharmaceutical drugs and the development of the drug for treatment of cancer. The first anti-cancer drug was discovered accidentally, and from a flowering plant which grew in the backyard of the research laboratory without the researcher's prior knowledge. This is the Periwinkle plant, which gave birth to the drug called INTERFERON.

Pharmaceutical products must follow stringent rules and regulatories before commercially sold to the public. The guidelines are there to protect the people from the damaging side effects of the drugs if any. The drugs must go through the procedure of clinical tests and trials on patients of different ages and status in life, the results must be recorded and side effects highlighted.

Street Smart

Quoting from [sixer]:

On sunday, an article in newspaper Hindustan(Hindi)caught my attention.

Dear SS,

I wanted to award 50MVPs in four forums separately, but alibaba felt differently.

The procedure for trial and finaly market introduction of drug is well explained by you.

But my point is that Pharma industry is not coming forward for clinical trials because drug is not patent, and is in use for other treatments for decades.

Hence they can not make huge profits out of this discovery , by some Canada based scientist.

So, are these companies working only for profits?

I recall Ranger had replied about donation of drugs worth hundreds of dollars by Merck et al on another topic , if my memory serves me right. But they are not coming forward for clinical trials

Sixer 

Replying to [sixer]: This is not an easy issue. One can certainly say that human health is more important than money. There should be no question about it. It is a horrible situation that there are people who's lives could have been saved if they had the money for the proper treatment. After all it is not medication alone that will save the sick. They need good doctors and good nutrition and shelter also.


It is also true that none of the doctors, pharmaceutical houses, farmers or builders want to work for free. They will not make large investments in the the develpement of new drugs or the purchase of tractors etc.

Everyone wants to make money and is not so sure that anyone else has to.

Profit should not be they only motive that is for sure but it can not be removed from the equation completely,because that approach doen't seem to work.

Most new discoveries that can help humanity seem to come from societies that allow the developer to be compensated.


We can hope that they are not too greedy. We can try and limit prices. We must not kill incentive.

Dear Kivi,

I fully agree that the Scientist deserves more than a Noble prize if clinical trials prove him right.Your views are pragmatic.

Sixer

Replying to [sixer]:

Hello there.. Answering the question is not the issue here as far as my understanding goes. There are many questions that comes to my mind. I have indicated a few for reference which is of my personal opinion - experience and research:

How come this was published only in the Hindi edition of the national paper?

Was it to target only Hindi speaking or certain section of the population ?

Not only in a vast country like India but there are other countries where people play with others emotions - money etc by giving false HOPE

Is this Pharmaceutical company registered with the relavant authorities?

Do they have a proper lab/facilities and are authorised to conduct tests to evaluate this drug? or Is it one of those secret labs which do surface from time to time when disaster strikes !!

Replying to [sixer]:

"You award 50 MVPs and make your own posting as Recomended reading, which earns back the 50 MVPs before you even award them." Streetsmart

You have a point.

Replying to [sixer]: I give kudos to Sixer for his great achievement. Keep the Good work. You worth more than GOLD.
Thanks.
Yours,
Olajire Balogun
Nigeria

Dear sixer:

The 'drug' to cure cancer as mentioned in the Wikepedea and referred by you is Dicholoro Acetate. This is a chemical compound acidic to pH 3.1 (very strong and corrosive acid). pH7.0 is neutral, and every 1.0 pH different is log to the power of 10.

My first impression is the true claims of this bicholoracetate to cure cancer, so I went into a bit of research and these are my findings:

http://www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/summary.tcl?edf_substance_id=10140-87-1

Read the chemical profiles summary of this substance, EPA of US rated it a hazardous chemical, dangerous and highly pollutant. The medical groups also did not define the bicholoroactetate as anti-cancer, it can only be used to burn out corns and calluses and benign tumors but warn users on malignant tumors or cancer.

WARNING ! Not to be used on Cancer tumor

http://www.rxmed.com/b.main/b2.pharmaceutical/b2.1.monographs/CPS-%20Monographs/CPS-%20(General%20Monographs-%20B)/BICHLORACETIC%20ACID.html

Below is copy of the report by the Medical Scientific Team:

Quote.
Action And Clinical Pharmacology: Dichloroacetic acid rapidly penetrates and cauterizes skin, keratin and other tissues. Its cauterizing effect is comparable to that obtained with such methods as electrocautery or freezing. tag_IndicationsIndications

Indications And Clinical Uses: For all types of verrucae; calluses; hard and soft corns; xanthoma palpebrarum; seborrheic keratoses; ingrown nails; cysts and benign erosion of the cervix including endocervicitis; epistaxis.

Contra-Indications: Should not be used for the treatment of malignant or premalignant lesions. tag_WarningWarnings

Manufacturers' Warnings In Clinical States: Dichloroacetic acid is an extremely powerful keratolytic and cauterant. It should be restricted to those areas where these effects are desired.

Precautions And Adverse Reactions: Before treating cervical lesions a careful diagnosis and possibly a biopsy may be required to rule out malignancy. Treatment is contraindicated in the event of positive findings.

Topical chemical cauterant-keratolytics should be applied only to the lesion being treated. To prevent them from spreading onto normal skin, petrolatum is painted around the area to be treated. If any acid is accidentally spilled on normal tissue or if too much acid is accidentally applied, it should be immediately wiped up with a cotton pledget and washed with water. Sodium bicarbonate may be applied as a local antidote.

Prior to treatment with dichloroacetic acid the surfaces or cervical lesions must be well dried. If these surfaces have not been well dried or if too much acid is used, a fine trickle may be observed as a line of white moving downward on the cervix. If this occurs or if the vaginal wall is inadvertently touched with the applicator swab, immediately touch the affected area with a dry cotton swab following at once with a swab well moistened with water.

unquote.

Street Smart

Replying to [sixer]:

Seriously, I have no idea what was the article you read. But I will still give my opinion because it is something I have followed in US while I was in my college doing my chem engi major.

Here is what I know. Major Pharm Co, of course, looks at profit more than anything else. But there is a reason behind it. Let me just summarise it quickly.

Every cure and every new drug discovery is very expensive. I really mean really very Expensive.

At the beginning, Pharm company must put in as little as 1 mil to as much as 200mil for each new drug. Like SS just mentioned, the FDA, for example is renowned for their strict testing, and the chance of a new drug being approved is less than 10%.

So, lets put it this way. Your miracle pills has only less than 10% chance of being approved and your initial million of dollar of investment will go down easily by more than 90%. Also, if your miracle pills does get approved, the average time period that your pills will not be put off the shelf is only 10years. During these 10 years period, pharm co must start a whole new cycle of researching and investing millons of dollar on new drugs before a new competitor comes into the market with a new and better drugs. It is a very competitive market.

The amount of research and clinical test have increased over the years. That is one of the reason why new drugs have been put aside or whatever the pharm co is hidding for the fact that too much risk and too much monies are involved.

Yes, profit is the motive, but considering the fact that the company has to maintain hi-tech laboratory, renowned professors, engineers, technician, nurses, doctors, hi-tech factories, marketing, advertising, R&D for new drugs, clinical trials, equipments, hi-tech facilities....etc etc......so that all these can produce the new Drug to fight the un-curable disease like AIDS.



I guess, why not!