[willscott]

The text of the article is poorly written - with a focus too much on conspiracy theory rather than on actual science. The linked article is from 2007, and only reports on preliminary research.

There's a reason we have the scientific setup that we do, and it is to filer the noise, and protect the authenticity of the science. If these guys from Alberta are able to come back with good results on human trials, then other labs will independently confirm the result. The fact that drug companies aren't picking up research at a preliminary stage on a drug that won't be profitable shouldn't be surprising, but it also doesn't mean that the research won't go forwards.

[pg]

(This comment refers to the original, crappy article this link used to go to.)

[smokinn]

You're right that it doesn't mean the research won't go forwards since it's currently being funded by "philanthropic groups and individuals" according to wikipedia's article on Dichloroacetic acid which is a much better summary for lay people than the original article or this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dichloroacetic_acid#Results_of_...

[lostbit]

I also noticed the 2007 reference. However, further checking the Univesity site on News & Updates, one will find that it went further to Clinical Trials and a new article in 2010 shows interesting results for glioblastoma (a type of cancer).