As a person who has actually *had* cancer, I can say that some very good points are being made but some of you are very misguided. This will be longwinded, and I'm sorry I didn't paragraph that out better, but I will attempt to be concise and coherent and I feel it's important you know. Please read and feel free to share your comments, even if you don't agree with me.
On Money
It's not that too much money is being given to research, it's that the responsibility for research is being given to the wrong people (and by that I mean to businesses who are designed to make money). True, we have made some progress, so the money hasn't been *completely* wasted, and I guarantee you those who've been saved by those results would agree. But I do think Big Pharma is screwing us over, and that's why it's not the research but the researchers who are the problem. I won't even start about how corrupt and evil the US healthcare pharma-corps are. I am in favor of de-privatizing health care and increasing government funding and oversight (read up on healthcare in the Netherlands, their model is being studied for US use). And as for those who suggested cancer meds should be free, well shouldn't other meds be too? I think if you have done nothing to cause your disease (smoking, using drugs, having unprotected sex) you should not have to bear the cost. But if you did cause your disease the cost should not be punishingly high. And while we're on the subject, cancer is not "the affluent disease." Plenty of poor are stricken by cancer which is why there are so many cancer charities. Even wealthy people can be broken by the costs of treating cancer (again, not going down that road). For those who think corporations hiding the cure would be crushed by riots, think again. Look up the doctor in Kansas City that diluted children's cancer medicines and pocketed the extra money. Bio-med owns us all and does what it wants. If we want high quality affordable health care, the current biomed industry has to be restructured and asking greedy pharmaCEOs to give up their possible gaziilions in exploitation will not be that easy. That's why the responsibilty for *designing* the cure should rest in the hands of the people/government, and pharma should only be allowed to produce the medicines themselves. Okay, I need the tangent to stop now.
Research good, corporations controlling research to maximize profits at the expense of innocent lives bad.
On cures and preventions
I think that the finding the cure *is* prevention. If you can cure cancer, you don't need to prevent it. Right now, cancer isn't a slow and fairly treatable disease *as a whole* as one poster mentioned. Some cancers have been virtually eliminated, while even having others is a death sentence. Some cancers can kill in a few short months, depending on the severity. A cure means any future recurrence of the disease can be stopped before it harms/kills. And a cure can help us in case of mutations and metastases (when cancer goes from one part of your body to another). Cancer is sort of like HIV in that it's not just one simple thing. Each cancer has a different structure, which is why it can "jump" to and affect other body parts. It doesn't mutate into a totally new disease like HIV, just a different kind, but there are different forms of some cancers like lukemia. Curing cancer would be much better than preventing cancer because a cure would be guaranteedly effective whereas prevention can go wrong. The reason is that cancer is caused by things the average human has no control over (secondhand smoke, food additives, radiation from modern machinery and technology, etc). Preventing only works for factors we can control. Wasting money on lesser, non-fatal diseases like some STDs really sucks because we already *have* prevention: self-control, condoms, and common sense. I would be extra super pissed if some asshole got my cancer money to cure himself of easily preventable herpes or some kind of drug-disease from a knowing mistake he made when I would suffer and die from cancer and I did nothing wrong. People do not need education because they already know the stuff they do is bad. You'd have to have been living under a rock nowadays to not understand some of these things (drugs and unprotected sex). I realize that there are exceptions like rape victims, and I certainly wouldn't take the chance for a cure away from them, but I've never seen people be forced to do drugs, they do that to themselves. People need incentives for accountability and self-control. As for another factor we can't control, if you can cure the food industry of it's greed-based desire to feed us poison, then by all means do so, but a cure for cancer is much more realistic. There is also the fact that current "cures" cause a lot of suffering (chemo, radiation) and finding a better cure in addition to a permanent one is also part of the goal. I wouldn't want to take money way from other causes, as there are so many human tragedies that also take lives and also need to be alleviated, but in the case of cancer money and research are an absolute necessity. We need what's coming to us. You can't educate people out of cancer, and you can't prevent the environment. A cure would be the best protection we currently know of. There is also the fact that many cancers are caused by genetic mutations and defects, and curing said cancers would mean curing said mutations and defects which could pave the way for other genetic diseases. A cure for cancer really could mean at least assistance to curing other diseases.
And while I understand the greater ramifications of what the user above me said about sacrificing the few to save the many, it is not an acceptable (nor in this particular case necessary) course of action. I know you aren't trying to start a eugenics program, but seriously, don't be so cold to other human beings. I bet if your parent/child was one of those being sacrificed you'd feel different. The thing that really upset me was who you'd sacrifice me to: idiots who brought it on themselves with cultural and physical poisons. I know you included cancer in there, but, dude.
So, your thoughts?
