Do goverments really have the cures for aids , cancer, etc.but if they release them the earth will be over ...

populated

yes it is true. if they were to release them then it would be totally gridlock man. why do you think the royal family members always live to a ripe old age? think about it, apart from diana who the queen had killed so there wouldn't be a muslim baby in the royal family but thats besides the point. yes its true and you better believe it

Wow, I can't believe that answer won! I have never seen anything more full of crap than a toilet. Report It

Oh yes, totally true.

And that kool-aid you're drinking is sugar-free.

No.

Hey, that's what wars are for.

Tom a, it's the second answer I have seen from you tonight, and the second one I've given a thumbs up to.
I mean apart from the fact that my girlfriend has left me, and is prostituting herself in Italy, and did leave me with a suspect middle member after telling me she was pregnant, I still found your previous answer quite amusing! (What I just said is true.)
(And , yes Diana was killed)

Anyway to answer the question, I believe aids was manufactured in a lab, and that cancer can be cured.

A doctor does not get paid for the amount of people he makes well, but for the amount of people who are on his books who are sick!
Not surprising then when so many people require repeat prescriptions.
Loads of money in the pharmaceutical business, and the more serious illnesses in the world, the higher the demand for new research and new treatments.

That's absurd. Governments have very little to do with medicine. There are regulatory bodies, but the vast majority of research is done with private funding, and except for some proprietary secrets in the early developmental phases of drug development, there are no secrets in medicine. The real problem is with information overload. The vast majority of research leads up blind alleys, and it's sometimes difficult to pick the right answer among all the studies on any subject because of all the information that's often contradictory.
Besides, governments can control overpopulation in much easier ways but usually don't do so, even with medical treatments. Until recently, for instance, the number one killer in the world was diarrheal disease, but the widespread availability of WHO rehydration packets has significantly decreased the death rate. And then there are non-medical means of population control, including war.

Well. Scientists have been finding out Marijuana has many anti cancer properties (both for preventing AND treating) since the 1970s (look it up), yet, there is little funding going their way. If thats not the govt. keeping possible cures from us, then I don't know what is.

Numerous conspiracy theories on this topic abound, but so far none have any credible evidence. But I find it HIGHLY UNLIKELY that any nation would be withholding a cure.

Let's look at the two conditions you mentioned: HIV and Cancer.

HIV, the virus that eventually results in AIDS, is a RNA virus that infects the body's immune system, causing it to eventually stop working. It hides in immune system cells, and can undergo rapid mutation. The problem with treatment is because of HIV's living in immune cells. If you kill the immune cells then they can't function to protect you as they are supposed to do. You can't give a drug to destroy RNA either, because although that would probably kill HIV it would also kill the body's ability to make protein. There are numerous other problems with finding a cure. But in reality, there are very few cures for viruses. More often than not the human body either relies on a vaccine before infection, or it fights off the virus on its own. Thus if HIV can be cured, it will open up the door to numerous other viruses as well.

Cancer is not necessarily a disease so much as it is a condition in which the body's cells are replicating so fast and so much that they stop functioning as they are supposed to. Eventually they end up killing other cells and the continued growth, in the end, ends up killing the person if untreated. The problem with a cure lies in the fact that it is the body's own cells doing the damage. So a cure has to be able to differentiate between the properly functioning cells and the cancerous cells. Unlike people, you can't "tell" a drug where to go and what to do, but you can make it such that it is more likely to target one type of cell than another. But up to this point it is still very difficult for a drug to kill a cancer. Chemotherapy, for example, is a 'cure' in the fact that it can rid the body of some forms of cancer. But, again, because it is the body doing the damage to itself the cancer can sometimes return.

Also- you will sometimes hear about natural cures for a condition. Studies into natural cures are ongoing, but so far haven't suggested that natural supplements are a good route. However, it is a known fact that some natural products are good for the body in fighting off disease, and often times these will be used in drugs that are then made available to doctors in fighting off various conditions. So for instance, while marijuana is illegal, narcotics are used in numerous drugs to treat many different conditions.

To the person/university/entity that finds the cure to one or both of these conditions, money and fame will follow them forever.

Good luck.

Governments do not hide cures.

I believe it is very possible the hordes of money at stake are preventing the best possible treatment options for cancer, and probably AIDS. I abhor the drug companies and all they stand for. The only thing they are interested in making as much money as possible. The issue is extremely complex...... I think Will answered it best.