Not sure if someone would be framed or murdered for inventing a cure. I suppose it altogether possible that if there were more money involved in the treatment of a malady than a cure, and a company possessed ownership of both the treatment and the cure; then they may choose to suppress the cure and promote the treatment.
As with anything, if a need exists, multiple parties will be developing treatments and such. I would think if a cure was invented, such as a drug to cure cancer, then the drug companies would want to cash in while they had proprietary ownership of the formula.
As with anything, if a need exists, multiple parties will be developing treatments and such. I would think if a cure was invented, such as a drug to cure cancer, then the drug companies would want to cash in while they had proprietary ownership of the formula.
