Via a tweet from Gimpy, I've found this brilliant comic explaining why we will likely never find a cure for cancer, at least not a pill or procedure that will solve all of our oncological ills.
So if you've asked recently: Why have we not yet found the cure to cancer? You probably won't like the answer, but that's possibly because you don't fully understand the question.
Update: I forgot what prompted this post. It was Brown during his speech:
And so with three major steps forward – early diagnosis, early treatment and our historic investment in research for cancer cures, we in Britain can transform cancer care; and our ambition is no less than to beat cancer in this generationBest of luck with that, champ.
Oh and heads up, I'll be throwing out another LHC post soon. This time we're talking engineering and issues -the real stuff.
8 comments:
It'll never be found by the cancer research agencies...
They would go out of business.
Thing is there are cures and preventative measures for cancer.
So the cartoon is half right
Right.
So all of the -literally- thousands of agencies all around the world researching the causes and treatment of cancer, are actually just maintaining the status quo, despite the fact that they (and their relatives) will almost certainly be affected by cancer in their lifetime. And presumably they are covering up the REAL cure for cancer, which is known to a select few, but mainly among the noted moonbats at naturalnews who you are so very fond of echoing.
Needless to say, I am less than convinced. But then this is because I generally form opinion based on facts and justified argument; not empty rhetoric based on the ravings of known quacks whose only selling point is providing anti-establishment nonsense because they have yet to meet a conspiracy theory they didn't like.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Chy1003Xf1Y
How did the human race survive so long if there was so many cancers to cull the populations?
Answer me that one?
Listen to the MD in the youtube above. Separate fact from theory.
Just because 95% of the world believes that there is no cure for cancer doesnt mean its not actually out there.
In fact I have a real life example of that I know of someone who lived for 20 odd years after their diagnosis and they are still around So they got cured what cured them? I really do wonder about what actually happened there.
there were* sorry grammar
I don't think you understand. He's going to pass a law against cancer, so it can't possibly occur.
Or at least, not unless it wants an ASBO.
And since nobody ever died of anything horrible which wasn't cancer, that means he has saved the world again.
You are never satisfied.
WOAR: Heh, I am unreasonable like that.
Henry: Cancer is predominantly a disease of the old, which if we do encounter it, is almost certainly after we have reached breeding age; so there's no reason why it would get in the way of the species.
As for your friend: It's a messed up family of diseases, and spontaneous remission happens sometimes. Obviously I cant say anything about his case, but I am pleased for him - It's always great when people beat the odds.
And there are 'cures' ( if I had a cancerous finger and it hadn't spread, we could cut it off = cured), just nothing universal because it is not one disease; it's a myriad of conditions, all requiring different treatments at different points in their development.
And the best we're likely to be able to do is refine those treatments.
The good thing is that if CRUK ever ring again asking for money, I can tell them that it's OK, Gordon is on the case. He's beating cancer for me and I already pay for his services.
That, or the usual 'fuck off'.
DP: Yep, they may as well hand in the lab-coats and put the petri dishes in storage, because the saviour of the world is here to add another notch to his belt.
Post a Comment