Slashdot Mirror
Sean Parker Announces $250 Million Grant To Fight Cancer (cnn.com)
Robert Mclean, reporting for CNN: Silicon Valley billionaire Sean Parker announced a $250 million grant on Wednesday to establish the Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, which aims to increase collaboration among researchers and accelerate the development of immune therapies. Immunotherapy uses the body's own immune system to help fight cancer, and is considered one of the most promising areas of emerging cancer research. More than 40 laboratories and more than 300 researchers and immunologists will participate in the project, including six top cancer centers: Memorial Sloan Kettering, University of Pennsylvania, University of Texas, Stanford, UCLA and UCSF. The Institute said that under the program, intellectual property licensing, data collection and clinical trials across multiple centers will be unified for the first time. The administration of all intellectual property will be shared across teams.
250 million??? Dr Evil is impressed.
Silicon Valley billionaire [and Napster founder] Sean Parker... establish[ed] the Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy,...under the program, intellectual property licensing... will be unified for the first time. The administration of all intellectual property will be shared across teams.
"Napsterman To Copyright Cure For Cancer", huh? If they succeed, karma dictates that pretty soon everyone will hoarding two full lifetimes worth of Parker Institutes cancer cures, even for cancers that they don't have and have no particular need to cure.
it's Settled Science: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02...
Why do people always start their own foundation? It's a duplication of effort. You need to hire people to run things, need to do all the legal stuff, etc., etc. Why not take that money and give it to an existing organization? The pride of having YOUR NAME on the effort?
Love sees no species.
South Park reference: "And... it's gone..."
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
there are more than 200 cancer treatment centers in the US alone, not counting the inumerable rise of "alternative" treatment centers that forego the scientific method in favour of wreckless naturalism and holistics. Do we need yet another branded expression of a rich mans ego masquerading as anything more than fleeting concern for a personal interest in a likely singular event of cancer? very little attention is paid to the environmental factors --equally inumerable-- that act as either cancer suspect agents or outright carcinogens themselves. Strides have been made in ablating BPA and Lead from our food chain, but more can and should be done to reign in things like Acrylamide and the carte blanc appropriation of nearly every organic and inorganic chemistry development to the amorphous Generally-Regarded-As-Safe (GRAS) monicker so often championed by chemical companies. 250 million dollars applied to strengthening the EPA, the FDA, and legislation designed to protect consumers would do arguably much more to prevent cancer. Reforming the harbingers of the largest cause of preventable disease in the world --major multinational fast and processed food conglomerates-- would surely act more immediately than a pet research institute.
Good people go to bed earlier.
so to sell them lifelong! Duhhh!
So he stole billions of dollars in revenue from hard working Artists, and in turn is now a Philanthropists.
Very funny, it reminds me of those junk bond guys who fucked everyone out of their money and then donate to Jewish causes, making them "Philanthropists".
Moral of the story: Crime pays.
Slashderpsters can only complain. This place was much more useful before the smart people left due to all the derp.
The Institute said that under the program, intellectual property licensing, data collection and clinical trials across multiple centers will be unified for the first time.
So what? That does nothing to make it useful, it just makes it less useful cause you'll now have 6 groups competing to learn and gain from the shared research all while hiding the bits of research and data they think they can patent and make profitable.
If you want to actually cure cancer, make ALL THE RESEARCH ENTIRELY OPEN WITH NO STRINGS ATTACHED.
THEN come talk to me about actually wanting to cure cancer and do it with collaboration and do it for the good of humanity.
This is just another advertising gimmick for someone trying to patent a new drug(s). 250m isn't really worth mentioning, these groups will eat 250m in money squabbling over what growth aggregate they should be using before the research even starts.
Stop pretending this bullshit is for the public good, its just another way to profit and you're being dup'd into thinking its something good.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
There are so many more appropriate and useful things to do with $250 million....
after decades of research and billions of dollars spend, I don't believe cancer will be cured, not because it is difficult, but because the farmaceutical industry doesn't want to, it's much more profitable to treat the disease than to actually cure it.. At the moment it looks to me that a lot of people seem to get/have cancer, but as I said I don't see a real future in were we will see it actually cured (even though we already do have the knowledge and technology to actually do it)..
There are already 3 proven cures for cancer. It is all in this documentary:
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com...
Of course, the National Cancer Inst, part of the US's National Institutes of Health, has an *annual* budget just for itself of $4.9 *billion*. And a good bit goes to researchers around the US, such as colleges.
mark