RE: Why there is no cure for cancer on the market, Part I – written in collaboration with oncologist
I think, in addition to the information given in the post, an answer to why there is no cure, singular, to cancer is that cancer is not a single disease but a group of many complex diseases which would make it very difficult, if not impossible, to make a single drug cure all of these very different ailments.
One question that I do have though is that radiation was found to cause genetic mutations in 1927 which could be used to directly question its potential to cause cancer. My question from this is if there is a reason you are leaving this fact out? I mean I understand that there are vary large quantities of successes when it comes to oncological research, especially in the time frame given, and that you would not be able to put all of them. It was just a curiosity, otherwise the post was a good read.
Today I will write about the modern ages, from WWII until 2000's with the focus on the development of molecular biology methods as well. Considering the radium, until recently, the logic was "wack them all".
Cell cultures became popular somewhere between 1940 and 1950 thus at the time it was easier to work with the whole animals.
Plus we should keep in mind that the radium and the radioactivity at that time was a bit "hype".
I tried to find when the MTT (cytotoxicity) test was discovered but it came after radioactive-based assays, thus it also must be after WWII. Probably they intentionally tried with something that kills all the cells. And they tried to "localize" the effect by using those needles.
Part II will be much more interesting.
Thanks for support! :)