Keeping in mind, that compared to the scope of the problem, over 500,000 americans year die of Cancer, our investment has been miniscule.
Compare this to EBola, which, even liberal estimates suggest we won't see more than 100 fatalities/year in the United States, and America has invested $1Billion.
Cancer is a multi-trillion dollar problem - but the technology required to effectively combat it (nanobots, protein folding technology, targeted molecules, rapid-dynamic DNA assessment) is still many decades in the future.
Of course, doing the basic research to develop those technologies is going to cost a lot of money as well. But the difference is, unlike many human maladies (Old Age) Cancer has a pretty well defined solution, we (perhaps appropriately) just haven't invested enough time and resources to deliver that solution yet.
Compare this to EBola, which, even liberal estimates suggest we won't see more than 100 fatalities/year in the United States, and America has invested $1Billion.
Cancer is a multi-trillion dollar problem - but the technology required to effectively combat it (nanobots, protein folding technology, targeted molecules, rapid-dynamic DNA assessment) is still many decades in the future.
Of course, doing the basic research to develop those technologies is going to cost a lot of money as well. But the difference is, unlike many human maladies (Old Age) Cancer has a pretty well defined solution, we (perhaps appropriately) just haven't invested enough time and resources to deliver that solution yet.