If Cancer Were Cured...would it be bad?

[T'Baio]

All those millions of people, not dying. Who would support them? Would our already fragile infrastructure, that is straining to make social security and pension payments as it is be able to keep up? What about the lack of rooms in old folks homes? People already talk of food shortages and water shortages. What would the impact to the environment be?

We should leave cancer alone and look into euthanasia for those suffering painfully. People need to die, just let them do it in peace.

 

[ShamelessMcBundy]

I'd rather a loved one not die of cancer. I already lost a dear friend to cancer. His last few days were horrible for all involved. If there was a cure, he'd still be here.

 

[Messianni]

It'd be bad for the pharmecutical companies, that's for damn sure.

 

[ShamelessMcBundy]

I'd be all for that.

 

[T'Baio]

I'd rather a loved one not die of cancer. I already lost a dear friend to cancer. His last few days were horrible for all involved. If there was a cure, he'd still be here.

How would you prefer they die?

 

[ShamelessMcBundy]

I'd rather a loved one not die of cancer. I already lost a dear friend to cancer. His last few days were horrible for all involved. If there was a cure, he'd still be here.

How would you prefer they die?

From old age.

 

[Danoz]

All those millions of people, not dying. Who would support them? Would our already fragile infrastructure, that is straining to make social security and pension payments as it is be able to keep up? What about the lack of rooms in old folks homes? People already talk of food shortages and water shortages. What would the impact to the environment be?

We should leave cancer alone and look into euthanasia for those suffering painfully. People need to die, just let them do it in peace.

Forgive my language, but I fucking disagree with you. Visit the pediatric oncology ward at Saint Jude and, if you're human, you'll change this view very quickly. We don't need widespread disease to weed out our population. There's enough food and water on this planet to feed every man, woman and child on it-- we just do a piss poor job at distribution (though a vast improvement from previous generations).

Man, some of you people and your pessimistic world views are freaking me out lately. If you have these kinds of melancholy perceptions on humanity, you need to be experiencing people and living your life-- not posting on a message forum (and this isn't entirely directed toward the OP, this is directed toward the posters in the "Is the world worth it" thread, also.) How are you people fans of Star Trek, of all things?

 

[Plecostomus]

Well there will never be a one-shot "cure" for all forms of cancer... there are many different types and forms... some are genetic, some are induced by viral activity, some are caused by exposure to environmental toxins, others we're not 100% sure of.

That said, my wife lost her leg recently to cancer, one of the ones they "aren't sure" of a cause of. But THIS TIME they are certain it can't come back. It seemed to want to grow in this one specific location and slowly spread out crowding out healthy tissue... so they took the entire "location" out of the picture.

We shall see!

Now AIDS, I'm all for getting rid of that in one go. Its in my population pool cramp'n my style if you know what I mean.

 

[Maestro]

Damn hemocytes will over run the world if we cure cancer!

 

[JonathonWally]

Now AIDS, I'm all for getting rid of that in one go. Its in my population pool cramp'n my style if you know what I mean.

There's a cure if you're insanely rich. They haven't found any in Magic Johnson in over 10 years now.

 

[T'Baio]

I'd rather a loved one not die of cancer. I already lost a dear friend to cancer. His last few days were horrible for all involved. If there was a cure, he'd still be here.

How would you prefer they die?

From old age.

Which is heart attack, stroke, alzheimers, liver disease, renal failure...there are no guaranteed "nice" deaths in anything. There's no such thing as dying from old age.

 

[Danoz]

Well there will never be a one-shot "cure" for all forms of cancer... there are many different types and forms... some are genetic, some are induced by viral activity, some are caused by exposure to environmental toxins, others we're not 100% sure of.

That said, my wife lost her leg recently to cancer, one of the ones they "aren't sure" of a cause of. But THIS TIME they are certain it can't come back. It seemed to want to grow in this one specific location and slowly spread out crowding out healthy tissue... so they took the entire "location" out of the picture.

I wouldn't say never, at least, not in the near future. There are theorists who believe medical nanotechnology could someday be used to regenerate tissue at the cellular level. And I am sorry to hear about your wife, and I'm glad to hear she is still alive!

We shall see!

Now AIDS, I'm all for getting rid of that in one go. Its in my population pool cramp'n my style if you know what I mean.

AIDS will be contained before it is cured. We can already prevent (at high percentages) mother-to-child transmission with inexpensive treatments. Where it is most dangerous is in these high risk populations where it spreads so easily, and containing it is a matter of mass testing and curbing behavior at the primal level (not an easy task).

 

[Mallory]

I've had it twice and am currently in remission. I'll take a cure any day.

 

[Danoz]

How would you prefer they die?

From old age.

Which is heart attack, stroke, alzheimers, liver disease, renal failure...there are no guaranteed "nice" deaths in anything. There's no such thing as dying from old age.

Technically, you're right, but you're missing the point completely. If you die from any of those things in your 80s+, you died from old age.

 

[ShamelessMcBundy]

From old age.

Which is heart attack, stroke, alzheimers, liver disease, renal failure...there are no guaranteed "nice" deaths in anything. There's no such thing as dying from old age.

Technically, you're right, but you're missing the point completely. If you die from any of those things in your 80s+, you died from old age.

I was about to say something, but you summed it up well. Thank you.

 

[Plecostomus]

I wouldn't say never, at least, not in the near future. There are theorists who believe medical nanotechnology could someday be used to regenerate tissue at the cellular level. And I am sorry to hear about your wife, and I'm glad to hear she is still alive!

Yeah so am I. The program Jenifer.exe is the important part, so long as that keeps running at it current levels everything will be fine. The hardware is nice to look at but the software is what makes her special.

It'd be neat for this to be relegated to "minor annoyance," get your faulty leg lopped off, slather on some nano-tech/stem-cells and six months later have a new cancer-less leg.

 

[Trekker4747]

To borrow from Chris Rock.

They're not going to cure it, they'll just find a way for you to "live with it." There's no money in the cure. A liftetime of medication? $$$

The inherent problem with companies running healthcare and drug/treatment research.

 

[Holdfast]

All those millions of people, not dying. Who would support them? Would our already fragile infrastructure, that is straining to make social security and pension payments as it is be able to keep up? What about the lack of rooms in old folks homes? People already talk of food shortages and water shortages. What would the impact to the environment be?

It just moves the Malthusian goalposts a bit, that's all. There's plenty else to die from. But the effects would be a bit unpredictable, you're right.

It's like stopping war, or poverty or whatever other plague one cares to mention. They're all what's called "wicked problems", with too many geopoliticosocioeconomic variables to accurately predict the outcome; no way of fully modelling it in advance and testing theories.

When faced with a wicked problem, it's much better to short-circuit the process. Just do what your gut tells you is right and focus on the short or medium term and let the long term take care of yourself. In this case, the "gut" reaction is to cure and figure out the rest of the problems that this decision generates afterward.

 

[Gertch]

I don't think we'll be seeing any mainstream 'cures' unless big pharma comes out with them. And the FDA will make sure of that in the US. Other countries are already using alternative methods to 'cure' cancer and other virus's now.

Would it be bad? No. It's increased quality and quantity of life for many.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

It's like stopping war, or poverty or whatever other plague one cares to mention. They're all what's called "wicked problems", with too many geopoliticosocioeconomic variables to accurately predict the outcome; no way of fully modelling it in advance and testing theories.

When faced with a wicked problem, it's much better to short-circuit the process. Just do what your gut tells you is right and focus on the short or medium term and let the long term take care of yourself. In this case, the "gut" reaction is to cure and figure out the rest of the problems that this decision generates afterward.

Wicked problems. Interesting way of phrasing that. Are you sure you're not from Boston?

As for cancer: Whoever suggests that cancer isn't bad, or that a cure would be, clearly hasn't had to deal with it. My dad had prostate cancer; fortunately, they got it all, and he's healthy now. But for awhile I was afraid I'd lose him. Anyone who thinks cancer shouldn't be cured, had better hope they don't have to go through anything like that. To think that there's anyone who would question the absolute good of a cancer cure is making me so fucking mad I'm afraid I might say something that will get me warned, so I am going to stop here.

I leave with a final thought: Cure cancer. Get rid of it. Eradicate it completely. Whatever might follow from that, can't be worse than cancer. More people living? I'd call that a good result.