|
Post by Ryan on Dec 30, 2010 22:27:47 GMT -5
What say do people get in Ovarian Cancer? Brain Cancer? Leukemia?
While there are certain factors that can increase the risk of these cancers, they do strike without warning to those who do not expose themselves to such factors. These cancers are not preventable and the people who get these cancers often did not have a say in what caused it.
Also - your post about indigeenous people makes very little sense - indigenous people still get cancer, despite proper diet and excercise, but in most cases, they are not treated for cancer and die relatively quickly. Such is how the nature of the world acts in fact. Cancer is a genetic mutation that is not sustainable nor evolutionarily beneficial, so those who get cancer often die off quickly as they are not suitable to live and carry on in the gene pool. That is why most cancers found in animals progress rapidly and are not even treated (most animals receiving such cancers are put to sleep).
|
|
|
Post by qooqǝɯɐƃ on Dec 31, 2010 1:39:11 GMT -5
If it's your word over doctors who've observed such things as I've said I'll take the doctor's word for it.
|
|
|
Post by austkyzor on Jan 8, 2011 1:20:09 GMT -5
So, if I come back in 5 years with a PhD, you'll listen to my logic THEN?
Fuck that - I'm going to say what every biology professor, teacher, and medical researcher I've ever talked to has said:
All it means when cancer is removed from your body and it doesn't return is that it hasn't metastasized. You didn't cure it. You removed it. To cure it would imply that your body, with medical assistance, defeated it. That doesn't happen. White blood cells don't recognized cancerous cells as invaders, because they're not invaders in the first place.
You want to argue semantics? Fine, let's argue semantics.
Cancer is not a disease. A disease is something caused by a foreign invader, which a cancer cell is not. Cancer is a mutation. Treatments, regardless of what they are, or how often they're used, or who approves of them, are to remove the mutated cells. If they create a retrovirus that targets and attacks cancerous cells with a 100% success rate - then hooray, they've created a treatment that works 100% of the time to kill the cancerous cells. Your body, however, did nothing to help, which is why it's a treatment.
However - I will admit that if there was a type of gene therapy that could alter the DNA of every (and I do mean EVERY) WBC you had to recognize and attack cancerous cells, then, yes, that could be considered a cure - I don't believe that's within the realm of possibility though. But even then - cancer will still happen. There'll be new types of mutations - cancer cells that survive will adapt, and new treatments will have to be researched. That gene therapies could lead to an increased prevalence of leukemia, or spleen cancer, or bone cancer, or lymphoma. We can keep fighting, but cancer will never be beaten - neither will we.
Can we please stop arguing semantics now?
|
|
|
Post by austkyzor on Jan 8, 2011 1:23:20 GMT -5
Also - to add to Ryan's argument.
My grandfather died of bone cancer. It happened very suddenly, and he was gone 3 months after diagnosis.
My best friend's dad died of cancer after it metastasized from his leg to his heart.
Both were poster boys for perfect health.
Cancer can happen very suddenly - without warning - for any number of reasons.
|
|