New saliva test could identify cancer cells in minutes

A 10-minute cancer test - which uses a drop of saliva - could be in use within four years....

news.sky.com/story/1641667/...

Why its taking so long .. as its all ready past all trials is anyones guess.

[O2Trees]

Possibly because Big Pharma makes its profit from people being sick. Detecting cancer early would mean less treatment and would eat into those profits. Cynical? Yes definitely.

[Hidden in reply to O2Trees]

Only be Cynical if was not true. But i think you hit nail on the head.

I cant see any reason WHY it was not done sooner.

Guess if there was a really good push motive to cure it the could.

Look what BLF are doing trying to brake mold of one glove fits all when it comes to radio chemo therapy.

Then we have cancer waiting list .. Take Christies New Proton Beam Scanner this is Public Private funded.

So what patients are going to be left waiting PUBLIC or PRrIVATE one's

[Hidden]

That's really wonderful news....

I for one will buy one when they become available.

[mmzetor]

that's hope this will be available here as soon as possible

[velvet55]

Who knows why...all l know is it is a brilliant break through for the early detection of cancer, which in turn may improve survival rates.

The powers that be, have said it will be inexpensive, and available in approx 3 to 4 years.

Well done to the scientists who devised this.

Velvet xx

[katieoxo60]

Sounds revolutionary for the future, however on the cautious side whats the use of a diagnosis if we don't have the doctors and nurses to treat our cancer or the necessary finances for the treatment. Just a reflection at a time when junior doctors are striking and resigning from medical profession. Thank you for the link Sian x

[crustychin]

It first has to be "accepted" by N.I.C.E., as every other medication has to be. But o2trees says it all I think, as a customer cured is a customer lost to the multi-billion pound Big Pharmas, who don't want cures, they just want to keep peddling their poisons, at a price.

[servewithmintsauce]

Seriously? People actually believe that this is being kept from us or something?

So far, the only trials dome have been proof-of-concept trials, which mean very little. Next they have to do Phase 1 trials on animals with cancer and it may prove to just have been a coincidence. Then they have to test this in a group of healthy male volunteers to ensure that these results would not show in people without cancer. Then they can move to Phase III trials -- where I hope to be working in a few years -- at which point 75% of pharmaceuticals or compounds or ideas fail. If it still works in PIII trials (relatively small trial group of cancer patients) then they move on to Phase IV trials with a large trial population. If it is STILL good at this point and coming up with mostly flawless results, and the trial has been conducted well, other independent groups will have to do trials following similar patterns to ensure reproducibility, to make sure the original researchers weren't fabricating -- consciously or subconsciously -- their results to make a profit. After many trials have been carried through to PIV without issue, then and only then can the process of approval start. This approval process has absolutely nothing to do with the pharmaceutical companies; the FDA (in America) or MHRC (in the UK) have to request a peer review, such as a Cochrane review, of all the trials done. If there are any discrepancies, ANY, this could set the process back by years, a process which has already taken years. If there are no discrepancies, or after a discrepancy has been investigated and eliminated, then the appropriate pharmaceuticals governing body has to hold meetings and discussions and look at patenting and royalties etc.. If all is good, THEN IT CAN BE APPROVED.

It is COMPLETELY ILLEGAL for any researcher, medic, or other pharmaceutical professional to withhold trial information.

It is COMPLETELY ILLEGAL for any researcher, medic, or other pharmaceutical professional to withhold a negative or positive trial result.

It is COMPLETELY ILLEGAL for any researcher, medic, or other pharmaceutical professional to withhold a potential treatment or screening device/method, and it is FELONY for them to use such things for their own benefit (ie for their family and friends only).

It is COMPLETELY ILLEGAL for any researcher, medic, or other pharmaceutical professional to withdraw a positive result from the public domain unless it is openly proved to be fabricated and a court order is issued for the paper to be retracted, as in the case of Andrew Wakefield.

Unless you think that the legal system, regulatory bodies, pharmaceutical companies, medical bodies, researchers, and the rest of the world is conspiring against you, then there is no reason for such medications or screening measures to be withheld from the public.

[Hidden in reply to servewithmintsauce]

Thanks for taking the time to explain it to me.

Andy.

[servewithmintsauce in reply to Hidden]

You're welcome.

[Hidden]

I don't share the general cynicism here. Where would we be without "Big Pharma"? It takes many years & millions of pounds to bring a new therapy to market, so is very risky. Blame capitalism if you must, but the fact is, in a capitalist society such as ours, pharma companies aren't going to invest in anything which is never going to bring in a profit - they'd go out of business if they did, & then where would we be?

[servewithmintsauce in reply to Hidden]

Exactly! The selfsame people who complain about Big Pharma and All Its Evils are often the very people relying on 'Big Pharma' to live.

[Hidden]

Hi ...I have read the link and the response by servewithmintsauce. ..and it's a 100% right in its contents. .

Big pharma has nothing to do with it...has no involvement in it what's so ever.

It say in the link that testing has to be aproved ...

Servewithmintsauce has explained it so even I can understand it.

This post has given as reason to rejoice on what is a brilliant discovery for all people in the world.

Andy xx.