Home
Search transcripts:    Advanced Search
Notable New     Yorkers
Select     Notable New Yorker

Mary LaskerMary Lasker
Photo Gallery
Transcript

Part:         Session:         Page of 999

Lasker:

The amount of money in fiscal '46 was $550,000, wasn't it? In fiscal '46. It's come from that to 337 million now. But it ought to be 500 million in the next 18 months. But it's no use to have the money unless the money is mission-directed in part, and unless many people struggle to make serious contributions clinically as well as in basic research.

Q:

Would you focus on that and talk about the progress that is being made. Can all this money be absorbed profitably?

Lasker:

Oh, it can easily be absorbed and profitably, but it depends very much on how the money is divided, whether it's divided for so called basic research or whether any substantial amount is divided and used on clinical trials and in the development of new drugs, and the possible development of new immunotherapies. There's a whole field of cancer in immunotherapy that's just beginning to open up. It depends very much on the judgment with which the money is used when the money is divided. I don't think there's any doubt, however, that with the things that are now know in the virus field and are seeming to open up in the virus field, and this additional money, that it will hasten the eventual conquest of cancer greatly, because there's no way to do it without putting brains and time on it, and the only way you can put brains and time on it is by giving money to people, because otherwise they can't do it. People are not self financed, isn't that true?

Q:

Yes indeed. What is that attitude of the American Medical Society?

Lasker:

The American Medical Society was against the Senate bill.

Q:

In favor of the House?





© 2006 Columbia University Libraries | Oral History Research Office | Rights and Permissions | Help