Why Cancer Treatment Remains Ineffective?
I got this very interesting article from a researcher I trust.
It really helped me understand the "Que pasa" better, what's happening right now.
I thought I'd share this in the hope that it might help with your search in making an informed decision.
Enjoy reading
-------------------------------
Cancer Treatment Is Not a Drug Problem
It Is an Engineering Problem We Have Systematically Avoided.
Preface: How the cancer treatment market is currently structured.
Before discussing why cancer treatment remains so ineffective, it is necessary to understand where global resources are actually going.
Based on public health expenditure data and industry reports, the global cancer treatment market can be broadly divided into three components:
- Cancer drugs (chemotherapy, targeted therapy, immunotherapy)
- Medical services (hospitalization, surgery, imaging, monitoring, follow-up care)
- Therapeutic medical devices (interventional, ablative, physically acting systems)
A conservative, order-of-magnitude estimate suggests:
- Cancer drugs: approximately USD 200–250 billion per year
- Cancer-related medical services: approximately USD 400–600 billion per year
- Therapeutic medical devices: likely below USD 100 billion per year
In other words:
More than 80–90% of global cancer spending is currently absorbed by drugs and services,
while engineering-based therapeutic devices account for only a small fraction of total value.
This distribution is not driven by outcomes.
It is driven by how cancer has been defined as a problem.
1. The paradox of massive investment and persistent failure
Every year, over 10 million people die from cancer worldwide.
These deaths are often explained away as consequences of:
Late diagnosis
Unequal access
Insufficient funding
Limited technology
Yet this explanation collapses under closer inspection.
A large proportion of cancer patients today:
Receive multiple lines of treatment
Are treated in well-funded healthcare systems
Use the most advanced approved drugs available
And still die.
The uncomfortable reality is this:
Most cancer deaths are not caused by a lack of treatment options, but by the absence of treatments that are reliably effective, controllable, and predictable.
2. Why drug-based cancer therapy is structurally inefficient
Drug-based cancer therapy is built on a statistical success model.
A cancer drug is considered effective if:
It improves outcomes on average
Across large patient populations
Within acceptable toxicity limits
This framework has three unavoidable consequences:
Outcomes are probabilistic, not predictable
Individual failures are accepted as statistical necessity
Control over tumor elimination is indirect and delayed
Even the most advanced therapies—targeted or immune-based—do not offer:
Direct control over tumor destruction
Real-time feedback on efficacy
Predictable boundaries of effect
This is not a failure of science or effort.
It is a structural limitation of biological modulation as a control strategy.
Biology is complex, adaptive, and often nonlinear.
Drugs act within this complexity rather than controlling it.
3. Medical services amplify, but do not solve, the core problem
Medical services account for an even larger share of cancer spending than drugs.
However, services primarily:
Deliver treatments
Monitor disease progression
Manage complications
Extend time
They do not fundamentally change the mechanism of tumor control.
As a result:
The healthcare system becomes increasingly busy, expensive, and labor-intensive,
while the core therapeutic effectiveness remains largely unchanged.
This explains the persistent mismatch between:
Growing workforce
Rising costs
Limited improvement in cure rates
4. Medical devices represent a fundamentally different intervention paradigm
Therapeutic medical devices are not biological agents.
They are engineering systems.
Engineering systems are governed by principles that biology does not obey:
Defined operational boundaries
Direct, observable feedback
Deterministic cause–effect relationships
Explicit safety envelopes
A medical device is not validated by population averages.
It is validated by whether it does what it is designed to do, every time, within defined limits.
This distinction is critical.
5. Predictable Intervention as a governing principle
This is where the Predictable Intervention Principle (PPI) becomes central.
PPI can be stated succinctly:
Human intervention is legitimate only at system levels
where outcomes are observable, controllable, and predictable.
Drug-based cancer therapy violates this principle by necessity.
Engineering-based intervention satisfies it by design.
This is not an ideological statement.
It is an engineering constraint.
------------------------------------------------------------------
5 more points of "How cancer has been defined as a problem": to be continued...
6
4 comments
Why Cancer Treatment Remains Ineffective?
skool.com/cancerwarriors
Science-based group helping people navigate cancer through metabolic therapy, nutrition and integrative treatments
Leaderboard (30-day)
1
+165
2
+80
3
+80
4
🚀
🔥
+40
5
+27
Powered by