Health & Fitness >
Medicine Development
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedShould the government fund cancer research?
Results so far:
| No | 13% | 95 votes | Total: 711 votes | |
| Yes | 87% | 616 votes |
No
by Henri Zimand
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesCancer is not one illness as most people might think. When we speak of Cancer research it is researching in thousands of different cancers and that is the major challenge.
There are several basic cancers , but each one has hundreds of different cancers depending on the DNA of a person.We have improved tremendously in the research and medicine that we have today compared to what existed ten years ago,
Cancer has increased tremendously in the last few years and has become a major problem, the origins are still unknown , but most people have cancer cells in their bodies but they don't necessarily need to come out or be exposed. Genes is a very important factor and those people have naturally more chances of getting cancer. Another cause of cancer is the pollution we have brought to our world in foods in air in wastes.
So no Government should not fund cancer research but they should organize cancer research much better. Money has been pumped enough into the research and there is enough money. Governments should deal in two distinct ways and that is to co-ordinate all this money in better research. If governments would in each country put the different researchers together and co-ordinate their research in one major lab we would get better and faster results, and the money spent would be half of what is spent today.
The lab would be one big one with all the machinery all could share and you would not need hundreds of such labs in each country and that is where governments should intervene. The results would be much faster and better and we would find cures that are better and cheaper for all people in the world.
Another point which is very important and where the government should be involved but not with money is to research what causes cancer , the food , the air , the pollution , the electrical and radio waves anything and everything that could cause such disasters that did not exist hundreds of years ago to such extent.
Governments have not shown me evidence of really dealing with human problems but letting foundations collect money and let them deal with the research and the challenge is that too many foundations exist that deal in the same field. So time has come to use this money more wisely and co-ordinate research and how the money is spent and that is the only thing where governments should be involved.
It is up to donors to let their voice be heard and to force governments to be better active in dealing with research and making legislation that will save a lot of money and bring better results faster.
Learn more about this author, Henri Zimand.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Yes
During the 19th century, cholera and yellow fever epidemics were reaching American shores by passenger ship. A famous cholera epidemic in Buffalo, NY, in 1832 almost decimated the fledgling city. Medical treatments at the time were non-existent: antibiotics did not become known until the 20th century; the germ theory of disease was in its infancy, with Koch's Postulates first demonstrating conclusively the causative agent of a disease to be a microorganism in 1875. It is said that one half of the victims of the Buffalo epidemic died from fear of the disease, rather than the disease itself!
During this period, the Marine Hospital System (MHS) in the US - started in 1798 to provide treatment for merchant sailors - was expanded to prevent the arrival of further such epidemics on US shores. In 1887, a one room laboratory was established with the MHS. From this room the National Institutes of Health (NIH), now the main grant-giving agency in the medical sciences in the USA, was formed. The MHS went on to become what is now the Public Health System, overseeing the health of Americans.
Thus, it can be seen that a Government should defend its shores from a microbial invasion just as it would from a human invasion bearing arms. While antibiotics may have eased up our fears of some microorganisms, it has not reduced it altogether. Anthrax, a disease caused by the bacterium Bacillus anthraxis, remains in peoples minds. Mycobacterium tuberculosis remains a threat, as seen recently when a man infected with a drug-resistant strain made a much publicized international journey. The SARS virus was a big concern several years ago, and an epidemic was abated by tightening travel restrictions. Avian flu is a real threat every year, and constant surveillance world wide is done to try and prevent outbreaks occurring. An influenza pandemic in 1918 killed over 20 million people world wide. An outbreak of flu today, that killed millions in our crowded cities, could cripple the country. Financial centers would shut; travel would be halted. It would cost billions of dollars.
So absolutely a government should fund public health. A Government's duty is to protect its people - whether from invasion or from disease. Infectious disease illustrates this well, but the principle carries over to other areas. Cancer is a big killer, with over 10 million Americans (as of 2002) have some form of cancer. At least 200,000 of these sufferers are children. The economic cost in lost work days and illness is huge. Cancer is a public health issue - it affects society as a whole, and should be dealt with by society as a whole.
Cancer needs to be dealt with by research into prevention and cures. Once you have a disease, all the prevention in the world is not going to help. Treatments are still needed. Charities - I work for one myself - can do a fine job, especially with prevention, but research costs a lot of money, more than can be raised by individual donations alone. Charities need grants. Governments give grants.
The pharmaceutical industry is involved in the treatment side of the equation (there being no money in prevention), plowing in billions of private dollars. But they cannot act in a vacuum. We simply do not know enough about biology to sit down, design a new drug, manufacture it, and cure cancer. That is way the drug pipeline works, but they need targets: they need to know what to design their drugs against. This is the realm of basic science. This is what individual investigators in universities do. Sure, industry does do some of this, with the Novartis Institute being a great example. But this is not enough, and it cannot be relied upon to be a steady source of discoveries and innovations. Industries have a habit of folding, of being brought out, of changing direction. Governments can provide longer term stability.
Even if we imagine that the pharmaceutical companies could do all of its own basic research, this does still not remove governments from the picture. Smaller companies rely on small business grants, reviewed and granted by the NIH, for funding to get ideas out of basic labs and into clinics. There are the "orphan" diseases: diseases with a small patient population that big companies do not target as the pay-back is too small. Most pediatric cancers - my area - fall into this category. Or maybe you think the government should regulate the industry more, and force companies to work in areas they don't want to? I don't think you can do that.
Finally, the pharmaceutical industry needs an educated workforce. Without basic research on the mechanisms of cancer being done in University labs as part of the training of future generation of scientists, there would be no scientists for companies to hire to do their own science. A Government has a duty to provide an educated workforce to keep the economy moving. Without it, jobs will move to other countries.
So I vote heartily YES to this resolution. Government should provide funds for cancer research (and other health related issues).
Learn more about this author, Richard Heath.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
