Gato Moteado
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-23-08 11:50 AM
Original message |
how much money would it cost to find a cure for cancer and aids? |
|
would the three trillion dollars that the iraq war will cost us have been enough to cure cancer, aids, diabetes, or any other deadly diseases?
|
LakeSamish706
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-23-08 11:52 AM
Response to Original message |
1. Probably that and feed all of the hungry children of the world as well. n/t |
AndyA
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-23-08 11:53 AM
Response to Original message |
2. Three trillion dollars would have gone a long way toward making life |
|
better for every American, regardless of who they are.
It's absolutely criminal that so much money has been wasted on a war based on lies and greed.
|
fight4my3sons
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-23-08 11:57 AM
Response to Original message |
|
that question remided me of The three trillion dollar shopping spree site: http://3trillion.org/
|
Gman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-23-08 12:00 PM
Response to Original message |
4. The money it would cost to cure cancer and AIDS is no where near |
|
Edited on Wed Apr-23-08 12:00 PM by Gman
the amount of money it would cost the pharmaceuticals and shareholders of health care companies in lost business.
|
rudy23
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-23-08 12:00 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Why in the world would they want to cure themselves out of a multi-billion dollar industry? |
|
There's never any money in a cure--for any of our problems. With the disaster capitalists in charge, there aren't going to be any cures.
|
LeftishBrit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-24-08 07:07 AM
Response to Reply #5 |
12. Even if you want to attribute the worst possible motives... |
|
possibly because if people are cured of these diseases they'll live longer, and the longer they live, the more they'll consume treatments for the common chronic diseases of old age?
This idea of 'never any money is a cure' is exceedingly simplistic - and in that case, why are many cancers (e.g. many forms of childhood leukemia) often cured nowadays, when they would have been incurable 40 years ago? Why is life expectancy steadily rising in wealthier areas - the ones where drugs and doctors are most available - while remaining low or even going down in poor areas? The trouble with 'Big Pharma' is that it doesn't do enough for poorer people and their common diseases (such as malaria and TB; not to mention access to existing anti-HIV drugs); not that it is concealing cures from the better-off.
|
Systematic Chaos
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-23-08 12:01 PM
Response to Original message |
6. There are plenty of people out there who say it can be done holistically/nutritionally. |
|
I personally believe many of them know exactly what they're talking about.
|
LeftishBrit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-24-08 07:02 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
11. Cancer cannot be cured holistically/nutritionally... |
|
though healthy diet and lifestyle may reduce the risk of some forms of cancer developing in the first place.
Some people are able to control type 2 diabetes through diet alone - but not everyone, and it's not a cure. AIDS/HIV cannot even be controlled through diet.
Healthy lifestyle is important, but not a cure-all.
|
Turbineguy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-23-08 12:03 PM
Response to Original message |
7. The cost of the Bush administration |
|
will probably settle out around 10 trillion.
|
niyad
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-23-08 12:04 PM
Response to Original message |
8. three trillion plus would go far to dealing with many societal ills. |
DCKit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-23-08 01:22 PM
Response to Original message |
9. If you're looking for a cure. |
|
Why create a cure when the treatment is so much more profitable?
|
LeftishBrit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-23-08 02:53 PM
Response to Original message |
10. There is not likely to be a single cure for cancer, because it's really many diseases |
|
Some forms are already curable and often cured; though the cure itself is often painful. Others are very hard to cure.
AIDS and diabetes are more likely to have single cures.
And yes, I think there'd be more chance of cures for serious diseases if so much wasn't going on wars.
|
KharmaTrain
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-24-08 07:08 AM
Response to Original message |
13. It's Redirecting The Research Money |
|
There are a lot of great projects underway in the area of bio-genetic research that holds tremendous promise and has been the result of billions already spent. The problem is that the money doesn't go directly from the government to research, but now a lot comes through pharacutical and other outside companies who stand to benefit from any patents or other profit making opportunities that come out of this reasearch. A lot of government money now goes to the corporates and then into the research...and then once the patents are granted, the public has to wait 14-28 years for patents to expire for the prices on the drugs and procedures of this research to be affordable.
I'd rather reframe your question about directing the money to education. Imagine how many tuitions 3 trillion would pay for...how many new doctors, reasearchers and other advancements.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed Apr 17th 2024, 09:01 PM
Response to Original message |