John- why did you have to post that? You're going to make me get on my soap box now...
Yes, at first blush, this sounds great. Here are some (and certainly not all) of the issues:
1) He showed that it worked in animals. I can't tell you how many drugs have worked in mice and failed in humans. If there was a market for curing cancer in mice, I would be rich already.
2) The sob story about how "the cure for cancer is on a shelf but you can't have it because the pharma companies won't make any money" is complete and total BS. If this research was legitimate, the NIH, NCI, American cancer society, and a hundred other non-profit organizations would fund the human trials in a second. Sadly, this research was published in 2006. If the results were real, it would have been on the market already. Take a look at this article from 2007. NRM: Quacks pervert U of A doc's discovery
It turns out that there have been a few human trials performed, but none of them have shown that DCA works as well as advertised (if at all). Essentially, there isn't enough data to say for sure whether the drug works or not. I saw reports that a Phase III (large clinical trial) is now underway, but there is nothing listed at Home - ClinicalTrials.gov
. There are two clinical trials that are currently recruiting patients that use DCA.
3) It should be noted that the use of DCA to treat cancer has indeed been patented.
4) Finally, the claim that the drug is harmless is false. It is well documented that the drug causes peripheral neuropathy, or damage to your nervous system that causes tingling and tremors.
So, yeah, next time someone tells you that someone has the cure for cancer but pharma companies/the government/the man/aliens won't let us have it, just know that they are full of s**t.