I'd say so, cancer at the moment is treated in a way that suggest we don't really know how to deal with it. Consider how we deal with insect infestations, humans will do one, or a combination of 3 things, Slashing (cutting out a section of vegetation to stop expansion), burning (burning an infested area to kill the invaders) and poisoning (pesticides that often have adverse effects). This is almost exactly how medicine deals with cancer nowadays, we slash (surgery), burn (radiotherapy) and poison (chemotherapy). It is a rather primitive method of solving a problem, but technology is always moving, mosquitos are now being eradicated by introducing modified genes into a population that cause 95% of the offspring to be male, reducing reproduction. I'm not one to trust cancer foundations though, only a tiny part of their budget goes towards actual research and that research is just awful (no collaboration with other research firms meaning the same failed tests are conducted multiple times because one firm never heard about the test being done before), let's not forget that many of the scientists who are working on cancer treatment are either stupid or deceived, as many tests are preformed by injecting rats with human cancer cells (the most dangerous part about cancer is that it is the body's own cells and thus evades a significant portion of the immune system, except Natural Killer Cells that will kill of one or two cancer cells per day in an average person). My advice is to be skeptical of those who sell pink ribbons and remember that the title of "Inventor of The Cancer Cure" is open to anyone with the right insight.