Isn't chemotherapy the most widely-used cure? Everyone I know that has had cancer has had chemo. And, as the saying goes "prevention is better than the cure" - identifying and preventing cancer is better for everyone in the long run than just working on a cure. Also, exactly how much money goes into the prevention, and how much into the cure, that makes you say that one is "too much"?

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Exactly. And actually, millions of dollars a year go to cancer research. Way less goes to the adds telling you ways to lessen your risks. Frankly, there should be more adds like this.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Chemotheraphy isn't a cure. They just do it, and hope it works. That's why they're still searching for a cure.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Chemotherapy isn't infailable, but it can get rid of the cancer - that's what I'd call a cure. Obviously it's not 100% effective and doesn't work for everyone, which is why people are still seeking new methods, but I still reckon it's a cure.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

It may put your cancer in remission, but it always can come back

by Anonymous 13 years ago

Yes, it can come back, which is why most people who have had chemo have to be regularly checked for cancer, I think every 6 months, but that is because at it's best, chemo eliminates the cancer. Again, do you have any number (in dollars) on the amount of money that goes into prevention, and the amount that goes into seeking new cures, that makes you say that the amount going into prevention is too much, when the two are compared? It doesn't have to be an international or national amount, just one area's government's statistics.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

It's just my opinion, sorry I dont have statistics for you.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

That's ok, no problem. Just to let you know, I'm wasn't disagreeing to be a wanker, but because I believe teaching people to prevent cancer (the ones that can be prevented with certain lifestyles changes - sunscreen/skincare, not smoking - obvious most cancer is not a result of the patients actions) is better than treatment once they already have cancer. I live in Queensland, which has one of the highest rates of skin cancer in the world, and when I was little their were constant ads on sunscreen, sunglasses, wide-brim hats, etc. And, chemo is the current best cure, but as you said it isn't 100% effective, so money should be put into research for other methods of treating cancer, but I still reckon that encouraging people to make lifestyles choices that will reduce their risk of cancer is more important.

by Anonymous 13 years ago

You mean a better cure? Cancer is curable

by Anonymous 12 years ago

If we can prevent it in the first place, isn't that better than trying to fix it once it's there? I would rather bad things didn't happen than letting it happen and THEN working out what to do about it.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

An ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I'm not really "in the know" about curing cancer, but it seems like theres a shitton of public knowledge and fundraising for curing cancer. Especially breast cancer.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

This is kind of relevant and pretty awesome: http://www.geekosystem.com/17-yo-cancer-nanoparticle/

by Anonymous 12 years ago