This is what happens to anyone who claims to have had successful research into cancer cures. Dr Ko has been sacked and her research is being "undertaken" by other scientists.
Her patent:
Seven years after her initial discoveries, there are no clinical trials under way, nor are there any (that I could find) that will commence any time soon. Instead, what scientists are trying to do is to make synthetic bromopyurvate analogs that can be patented (and thus much more valueble). So here we have a detour that will take years of extra research and development in order to maximize profits, while the dirt cheap, off-the-shelf chemical that could be helping people NOW get's tossed aside because it can't be patented by a pharmaceutical company.
John's Hopkins destroyed Dr. Ko's career supposedly for publishing her results on 3-bromopyruvate too soon and with too much hype. Now science is proving her to be right. Not only that, but by almost single-handedly reviving the dead concept of cancer energetics (killing cancer cells by depriving them of their unique energy needs) Dr. Ko may have made the most important single brakethrough in cancer treatment research in decades. After destroying her for this, they now have the gaul to patent her work (and under different researcher's names).
However she is taking them to court. I cant find any updates however since about 2007.
______________________
Researcher claims premier medical school and its scientists blocked cancer work
Using an inexpensive drug, a Johns Hopkins University researcher eliminated advanced liver cancer in lab animals. That research is now at the center of a bitter employment dispute, as Dr. Young Ko sues Johns Hopkins and four colleagues, claiming she was discriminated against and her research impeded because she is an Asian woman with a successful project. The case is a window into how money, publicity and internal politics can influence research of a disease that kills thousands each year.
Dr. Young Ko believes that she has found a cure for cancer.
Using an inexpensive drug named 3-bromopyruvate, the Johns Hopkins University researcher was able to eliminate advanced liver cancer in lab animals. Earlier this year, after her work was profiled by the Baltimore Sun, dozens of cancer patients and their families contacted the medical school to ask when human trials would begin.
Not any time soon, it would seem. Ko's research is now at the center of a bitter employment dispute between the researcher and the university.
Ko sued Johns Hopkins and four colleagues in June, claiming she was discriminated against and her research was impeded because she is an Asian woman with a successful project. Among the allegations in the 108-page lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Maryland, are accusations that Ko's colleagues stole her research.
"We are interested to learn why Hopkins has not done all it can to support Dr. Ko in her research," says Charles Piven, a solo practitioner in Baltimore and one of Ko's attorneys.
Johns Hopkins denies the allegations, stating in court papers that it declined to renew Ko's three-year contract "in view of her lack of collegiality, cooperation, insubordination, and her hostile and insulting attacks directed at ... senior faculty members." Philip Roberts, an attorney in the Office of the Vice President and General Counsel at Johns Hopkins, declined to comment, citing the pending litigation.
------------------------------------
Anyone who knows a little bit about the current state of cancer treatments knows that with a few limited exceptions (eg. Gleevec), cancer treatment has changed very little since the 1970s. The cytotoxic agents used in chemotherapy are the same, and unfortunately the 5-year survival times for most cancers have also remained unchanged. But it isn?t only cancer. Remember ?Jerry?s kids?? There has not been one single drug to help those children with muscular dystrophy since the start of that famous telethon. Not one. They still die the same inevitable horrible deaths. Lou Gehrig?s Disease? Not one new treatment since the 1970s.
Alzheimer?s Disease, cystic fibrosis, Huntington?s Disease, scleroderma, pemphigus, myelofibrosis, pulmonary fibrosis, malaria, CJD, polycystic kidney disease, the list goes on and on. For all of these terrible diseases (as well as many others) there has been absolutely no treatment advances in 30 years. Furthermore, there have been virtually no new antibiotics (or any other anti-bacterial agents) developed in the last 30 years. This despite the ominous problem of antibiotic-resistant strains. New vaccines? Nothing.
Diagnostics has advances leaps and bounds. In other words, we are getting better at telling you what will kill you, but we still can?t do anything about it.
So why is this true? The system is broken at every level.
No comments:
Post a Comment