Unreliable Cancer Studies

The cancer detection and treatment industry generates enormous income for medical companies.  Due to the money involved, researches rarely document that cancer research is unreliable and can not be reproduced.

In cancer science, many 'discoveries' don't hold up

A former researcher at Amgen Inc  has found that many basic studies on cancer -- a high proportion of them from university labs -- are unreliable, with grim consequences for producing new medicines in the future.

 During a decade as head of global cancer research at Amgen, C. Glenn Begley identified 53 "landmark" publications -- papers in top journals, from reputable labs -- for his team to reproduce. Begley sought to double-check the findings before trying to build on them for drug development.

 Result: 47 of the 53 could not be replicated.  ...  As we tried to reproduce these papers we became convinced you can't take anything at face value.
...
Of 47 cancer projects at Bayer during 2011, less than one-quarter could reproduce previously reported findings, despite the efforts of three or four scientists working full time for up to a year.

Read the entire article to learn about selective publication of results and how grant money leads to unreliable results.