Crowdfunding Cancer Research? The Drug Awaits Testing

[Rhykker]

Crowdfunding Cancer Research? The Drug Awaits Testing

​

Project Marilyn is looking to crowdfund a patent-free anti-cancer drug.

We've seen crowdfunding jump the shark when cancer [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/136598-Potato-Salad-Kickstarter-Closes-With-55-000] research.

Specifically, Project Marilyn is looking for funds to test an anti-cancer drug called 9-deoxysibiromycin, or 9DS. This drug has shown promise for treating kidney, breast, and skin cancers, but because it was not patented, drug companies didn't see funding expensive clinical trials as a profitable investment. Why take all the risk and investment costs upon yourself, when other companies can then swoop in and produce the drug that you proved works?

9DS is not revolutionary - like other anti-cancer drugs, it works by inhibiting cell proliferation, since cancer is essentially uncontrolled cell reproduction. The Project Marilyn campaign is seeking $50,000 to take 9DS through a necessary experiment called a xenograft before it can enter clinical trials.

With 17 days left to go, the project has raised $16,401, and interested parties can pledge as little as $1 toward the goal. One reason this effort hasn't received more funding may lie in the very nature of scientific experimentation: positive results are not guaranteed. Even if the campaign raises $1,000,000, the results may ultimately prove the drug to be ineffective.

"It's very likely this will fail (for both social and scientific reasons)," writes Dr. Isaac Yonemoto on Hacker News [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8363068]. Dr. Yonemoto is a lead researcher on Project Marilyn and the prime mover behind IndieSci. "At the very least though, if it fails for scientific reasons, since experiments will be openly disclosed (unlike the siloed process at pharma r&d), we will learn something - even if that something is, 'don't try making this drug again.'"

Maybe this is just me, but there's something altogether backwards about a world in which the internet is willing to pledge $50,000 toward a practical joke while people trying to cure cancer [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/137361-Will-Ferrell-Video-Game-Indiegogo-Fight-Cancer-Campaign-Amazon-Xbox-Twitch] are struggling to raise half that amount. What do you think?

Source: Geek.com [http://pledge.indysci.org/liberate-pharmaceuticals]

Permalink

 

[Svarr]

Faith in humanity is at an all time low, as always.. :c

 

[UsefulPlayer 1]

Maybe this is just me, but there's something altogether backwards about a world in which the internet is willing to pledge $50,000 toward a practical joke while people trying to cure cancer [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/137361-Will-Ferrell-Video-Game-Indiegogo-Fight-Cancer-Campaign-Amazon-Xbox-Twitch] are struggling to raise half that amount. What do you think?

I feel like charity is a huge, huuuuuuuuuge thing for people to through money at.

If this project is underfunded, I would likely blame the lack of publicity. Now who's to blame for what people put on the news? A lot of people say its the audience because the news only reports on things that will grab people's attention.

Still, you sir, Mr. Rhykker (not you but journalists, or editors or something), could have brought this to the attention of the public sooner.

And that's what I think. This is a problem of lack of publicity too along with a problem of people being apathetic.

 

[UsefulPlayer 1]

double post

 

[Rhykker]

Maybe this is just me, but there's something altogether backwards about a world in which the internet is willing to pledge $50,000 toward a practical joke while people trying to cure cancer [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/137361-Will-Ferrell-Video-Game-Indiegogo-Fight-Cancer-Campaign-Amazon-Xbox-Twitch] are struggling to raise half that amount. What do you think?

I feel like charity is a huge, huuuuuuuuuge thing for people to through money at.

If this project is underfunded, I would likely blame the lack of publicity. Now who's to blame for what people put on the news? A lot of people say its the audience because the news only reports on things that will grab people's attention.

Still, you sir, Mr. Rhykker (not you but journalists, or editors or something), could have brought this to the attention of the public sooner.

And that's what I think. This is a problem of lack of publicity too along with a problem of people being apathetic.

That's a fair point. And I'd add to that, that scientists/researchers aren't the best at communicating their research/discoveries to the media, so these things aren't always on our radar, or aren't always presented to us in a way that shows their clear importance. Which is only natural - scientists are busy doing much more important things to be good at PR and promotion.