Is There a Concealed Cure for Cancer?

Key Insights

You’ve likely encountered this conspiracy theory before, perhaps from your uncle who still questions the Apollo 11 moon landing, or on a Reddit thread railing against "Big Pharma." The theory suggests that a cancer cure exists, but pharmaceutical companies — along with government health agencies and cancer charities — are keeping it hidden to continue profiting from treating and fundraising for the disease.

In essence, a covert group of pharmaceutical executives, researchers, and cancer-focused nonprofits are supposedly allowing over 8 million people to die annually worldwide to line their pockets with cancer-related profits. If this were true, it would amount to nothing short of medical genocide.

Ted Gansler, strategic director for pathology research at the American Cancer Society (ACS) and editor of CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, was so frequently confronted with the "hidden cure" myth that he conducted a survey in 2002 to explore the most common misconceptions about cancer. In the survey, he asked nearly 1,000 Americans if they believed there was a conspiracy to conceal a cancer cure.

"The results were even more shocking than I had anticipated," Gansler writes in an email. He reports that 27.3 percent of respondents believed the myth, while another 14.3 percent were unsure. "The 'secret cancer cure' is a classic conspiracy theory. Though it thrives partly on ignorance, misunderstanding, and mistrust of science, psychological research shows that creating and spreading such theories is a way for some people to cope with feelings of insecurity."

Cancer is a terrifying disease, and most of us have been personally touched by its destructive impact. However, just because the medical community hasn't yet discovered a universal cure for all cancers doesn’t mean they are keeping it from us.

The Financial Perspective

As Cancer Research UK pointed out in a post discussing 10 common cancer myths, if Big Pharma truly had access to a cure, even one relying on inexpensive drugs or generic alternatives, they could easily find a way to patent it and make huge profits. After all, people are already paying thousands for cancer treatments. Wouldn’t they be willing to pay even more for a cure if one existed?

Another undeniable reality is that pharmaceutical executives, researchers, government officials — and their families — are not exempt from cancer.

"Could any conspiracy be so perfect that oncologists and even global leaders would willingly die of cancer to protect a supposed secret?" asks Gansler.

Many Cancers Already Have High Survival Rates

One of the most convincing reasons the "hidden cure" conspiracy is false is that there could never be a single cure for cancer, as cancer is not a singular disease. The term "cancer" encompasses hundreds of related diseases with vastly different causes and mechanisms. Even within the same type of cancer, the disease can "evolve" in unique ways in different individuals, requiring tailored treatment plans for each patient.

The truth is that certain cancers, when diagnosed early, now have long-term survival rates of 70 percent or more, according to Gansler. These include breast cancer, prostate cancer, urinary bladder cancer, and melanoma of the skin. Unfortunately, he adds, "some cancers are highly resistant to the treatments currently available and studied."

While the "hidden cure" conspiracy is completely unfounded, it’s worth questioning whether the current methods of funding cancer research and drug development are the best way to find effective and affordable cures for both common and rare cancers.

For instance, the National Cancer Institute's 2017 budget, one of the main sources of scientific and medical research funding in the U.S., amounted to $5.69 billion. Despite slight annual increases in the NCI's budget, its true value has steadily decreased since 2003 due to inflation. The NCI typically collaborates with pharmaceutical companies or universities to conduct clinical trials.

In 2017, the U.S. National Institutes of Health allocated nearly $6 billion for cancer research, with additional funds directed toward specific areas such as cancer genomics, breast cancer, cervical cancer, and childhood leukemia.

However, these public investments pale in comparison to the private sector, where pharmaceutical companies are reportedly spending around $50 billion annually on cancer drug research and development.

Big Pharma and the Quest

The disparity between private and public cancer research funding has led some critics to suggest that Big Pharma is hindering the search for a cure by investing heavily in developing patentable, single-drug treatments, rather than exploring combination therapies or repurposing existing affordable generic drugs, like aspirin (see sidebar).

Eugene Brown serves as a scientific adviser for Global Cures, a nonprofit dedicated to helping cancer patients find evidence-based therapies outside the conventional "standard of care." This includes using supplements or generic medications that show promise in speeding recovery or reducing the side effects of chemotherapy and radiation.

Global Cures also promotes research aimed at repurposing existing drugs and FDA-approved compounds not initially designed for cancer treatment—an approach often overlooked by for-profit pharmaceutical companies and underfunded by government agencies.

Brown disagrees with the notion that Big Pharma is the primary obstacle in finding cancer cures, asserting that expecting pharmaceutical companies to invest in drug repurposing is like trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

"There needs to be more collaboration where governments, public institutions, and charitable organizations view this as a critical objective. Big Pharma can actually be integrated into the entire process," he states.

He points out that any repurposed drug would require a clinical trial before it could be prescribed for cancer, and a pharmaceutical company could facilitate this either for free or at cost as a goodwill gesture.