Let's say you could control medical research funds... please read on?

By controlling medical research funds, you are in a position to guarantee that a cure will be found in 15 years for any disease you chose. Unfortunately, no progress on any others would be made. Would you choose to target one disease?

Let's say you could control medical research funds... please read on?
I wouldn't target any one disease. Diseases aren't the central problem. There are countless possible microbes which can cause disease, and it doesn't make sense to develop vaccines and cures for each one.





Instead, I'd put all of the funds into researching a way to greatly strengthen the human immune system. This might involve stem cell research, pharmaceuticals, or nanotechnology.
Reply:If i could only choose one disease to cure and not spread the research funding over several diseases, then i would definitely settle with one. i'd pick cancer.
Reply:That's an interesting question.





Curing something, anything would be good.





Too much research funding goes into finding a new treatment that will never cure the patient, just control the symptoms so they can buy more medicine for the rest of their life.
Reply:Great question!!! I think that these medical research funds should be monitored. I believe there are many of these companies who are taking down big bucks to no avail! Where does all the money go??? In their silver lined pockets! I refuse to support any of them. With the kind of money that comes into them you'd think they'd have a cure but that would mean they'd be out of a job!!! Poor excuse in my book!
Reply:Unfortunately most research funds are from private corporations, specifically pharmaceutical companies, thus, are investing their resources for a projected profits in the future when their researches clicks.