HER MANHATTEN 2 Project

[Veronica]

Recent case with Mayo is very descriptive of the situation. There is a complete chaos in cancer research. Research centers do research only of their interest.We need a focused effort, a holistic approach similar to the efforts displayed in developing A bomb 65 years ago. Blind and double blind studies methods must be reviewed. New research planning and statistical methods must be introduced, improved NASA approach. Research centers should be ask to do specific research with specific objectives and not what is in their medical/scientific/personal/finacial interest. We cannot wait.
For start we should ask NASA for help to design the project.Also we have to identify influencial people in Washington and Ottawa to help us.

Great health to all of you.
Veronica

[al from Canada]

Veronica,

I agree 100% however, I must ask and please excuse my Canadan ignorance, what can NASA bring to the table? One thing is for certain, when it comes to health care, Washington and Ottawa should be working together. Just by virtue of the fact that we share the same air, the same lifestyles and the same diseases!

Regards,
Al

Political and or wealthy people who have been touched by this, both women and men should be staunch supporters. Isn't that what has helped most in Melbourne since PM's wife was diagnosed? Isn't that what helped get herceptin developed when it was almost lost?
Sassy

I have seen a number of articles that suggest that there is considerable duplication, wastage, etc, and that a more cooperative global approach is required - sounds familiar.

One agency has set up a review of the way the health/drug industry goverment functions to look to see if any improvements can be made. I will post it if I refind it.

At a wider level is this new or just human frailty - it will probably not change - the same ingredients the same cake -you only have to look at history - the repeated destruction of civilisations - only we have the ability to do it in more "stlye" this time - until we redefine the measures we use for self worth and acheivement, and find a more common sense of communal and global survival I fear little will change.

RB

[CLTann]

The idea of a unified research approach is indeed wonderful, theoretically. I am afraid what RB mentioned above would thwart the noble effort. Human beings are so full of egotism and argument, it is almost impossible to have one single ideal and program. For instance, someone would not give up on their pet project on a certain approach angle. The free world is built on the very idea that everyone can have their view expressed and carried out. Even we can force a dictatorial edict, how and who can be sure that the edict is indeed the best program?

Ann

[Veronica]

Ann, this is NOT a question of free world or dictatorship. Tax payers $ should be used effectively What we want is speedy CURE.And this can be achieved only by a FOCUSED research. Any researcher can research what he/she wants using own resources.
NASA is not a cancer research institution. But NASA is the only organization capable managing complex projects such as man on the moon or HER2 neu bc cure. Governments all over spend a great deal of $. We need to set up a MAP/PLAN of research then execute it using the best research facilities anywhere in the world. We have to mobilized the best brains we can find. OUR LIVES depend on it.
We have a choice: sit back and wait what comes or does not and hope we will be still around OR push for focused and ACCELERATED research to find a cure for HER2 bc.
May be I am dreaming, may be my cancer spread to my brain but I HATE sitting back and wait for some results of rather fuzzy research.Just search Google for HER2 neu: 250,000 references. Have you seen an overview of HER2 issue? a status report? Please let me know if you have.
Regards,
Veronica

[StephN]

Having attended the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposiun TWICE in a row, I think I have some grasp as to what is the problem, but will post more on this as I give it more thought.

[al from Canada]

Dear Veronica,

This issue transcends politics and it is my view that BC research has a hell of a lot more to do with the all mighty $$ than a political agenda. As well, historically the "political solution" has always had more to do with psychological perception than with objectified results. I still fall back on my thought that advocacy groups may be the vehicle to change. Although there is probably a very loose connection between all of the various advocacy groups, I don't think it would take an act of God to united them. It only takes one to get the ball rolling and then pressure on the others to join in.

All that being said, I feel that it could take an outside non-partisan group such as ourselves to lobby attention to the problem and then to rally the troups behind our initial supporter for a unified movement .

To be clear, what we want is giving oncologists discretionary power over treatments for terminally ill cancer patients, and these treatments be within the parametres of our publically funded health care system. (ie, administering hopeful drugs, off-label to stage 4 cancer patients) If those are the battle lines, count me in.

Regards,
Al